Teenager Begs to Continue Conversion Therapy for His Unwanted Same-Sex Attraction

This boy is right:

In his affidavit, the 15-year-old boy, going by the pseudonym John Doe, argues that his right to undergo conversion therapy is bound up in his religious freedom.

"No one has forced or coerced me to attend counseling with my therapist," he writes. "At the end of the day, I am the one who wants to continue treatment for my unwanted same-sex attractions."

John Doe says he first started to experience "Gender-Identity Disorder (G.I.D.) and Same-Sex Attraction" when he was around nine years old. "When I was 10, I started feeling like I wanted to commit suicide because I didn't like myself," he writes. "I thought I would like myself much better if I were a girl." When he was 12 or 13, he says, he started to experience "crushes," (quotes his) on men he saw in magazines.

"I hated myself because I wasn't as good as these guys," he writes. "These guys were muscular and athletic, and I knew I wasn't. I thought if I were a girl, I wouldn't have to compete with them anymore." Self-hatred caused panic attacks, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, sleeplessness, and suicidal thoughts.

"My life was spinning out of control, and I was so depressed, I was thinking about killing myself around the clock," Doe adds. "My parents knew I was suicidal, so after my most extreme outburst to that point and when they found pictures of guys under my mattress, they took me to a new therapist."

His new therapist focused on his same-sex attractions, telling him they were "really the manifestation of underlying emotional issues and and childhood wounds that were caused by unmet needs I had as a child," Doe says. The therapist also told him that "fully recognizing [his] heterosexual potential" might be "a lifelong process."

"My religious belief and conviction is that homosexuality is wrong," Doe writes. "I wanted to address that value-conflict because my same-sex attractions are contrary to the religious values that I hold...I want to resolve my sexual attractions so that I act in conformity with my religious beliefs." With the new therapist, "I can really say I am improving. I now have a normal "guy" voice, I don't shave my body hair anymore, and I definitely have a better relationship with my father. I do not have thoughts of suicide anymore and my confidence as a guy is starting to build."

In NJ Conversion Therapy Lawsuit, A Teenage Boy Begs To Continue Counseling for His "Unwanted Same-Sex Attractions"

Tom1

Tom Usher

And then there are the boys who have been homosexually raped and have had that homosexuality imprinted on them where they used to be heterosexually oriented. These idiotic anti-conversion laws strip such boys (and girls who are suffering with unwanted same-sex attraction) of their humanity. The evil laws are designed to leave such children stranded until they are adults if they make it that far. They are written by panicky homosexual activists and their equally confused supporters out to get their confusion sanctioned by law and all opposition to it banned under threats of punishment and imprisonment and perhaps worse, much worse, if the homosexual fascists, and they are fascistic in their legal dealings, get their way.

The homosexual fascists are dead set against the Free Exercise of Religion that is enshrined in the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution. The very first rights enumerated in that document concern religious freedom. That was intentional to make religious rights as elevated as possible. They knew the history of religious persecution. They attempted to force a balancing where the state would not force any particular religion on the people nor prevent the people from adopting the religion of their choice.

Of course there were restraints upon religious exercise where grave harms could occur, but the 15-year-old boy quoted above by pursuing his dreams of being free from the same-sex attraction that he does not want and can be rid of, will cause no grave harm to anyone thereby, quite the contrary, as his testimony so far clearly shows. His life was improving greatly until New Jersey, in it's infinite ignorance and homosexual selfishness, banned him from continuing. No one was being harmed at all by his therapy, only helped.

Now come the homosexual activists hellbent on ripping that religious freedom out of the Constitution without any legal amending process whatsoever but simply by confused, activists courts taking it upon themselves ("judges") to bend the rights to put homosexuality at the top of all rights to the point of supporting laws outlawing the freedom of speech and the press and religion in opposition to homosexuality and regardless of all the scientific and medical and psychological proof that homosexuality in the aggregate and despite "affirmation" is a very dangerous thing, a very harmful vector and disease state.

Donate


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)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.