It may well be that every teenager who identifies as gay does not need the same thing either. What they do NOT need in any event is useless and potentially harmful “therapy” intended to change their sexual orientation. As a onetime teacher, I know perfectly well that how someone feels at 13 may not be how they feel at 15, which in turn may not be how they feel at 18. If they are conflicted over their sexual attractions, they need reassurance that if they finally turn out straight that is absolutely fine, and if they finally turn out gay or bi-sexual that is equally fine. Unless their sexuality manifests itself in a harmful way, e.g. predatory behaviour, there is no justification for attempting to tamper with it.

For the same reason there is not a simple answer as to the correct response to a 5 yr old who says they want to be the opposite sex. i.e. Every 5 yr old who presents exactly the same and says exactly the same thing–does not need the same thing.

That is true with very concrete physical realities–and compounded many times with matters of gender and sexuality.

And this is the exact reason why conversion therapy is a waste of time, harmful, and doesn’t address the REAL issue– societal prejudice expressed through legal channels as sodomy laws, medical channels as mental illness, and Religous channels as the unforgivable sin against nature and nature’s god.

Much the same mechanisms have been used forever against women and racial minorities. the reality remains there is nothing wrong with these kids and never has been. Every gay kid that grows up to be a functioning, loving human being despite the mountains of social feces tossed at them by chittering educated apes is a testament to both the innate health of gay people and the innate social sickness of prejudice.

I suggest the following alternative argument:

“While spontaneous change of sexual orientation cannot be ruled out, such cases are exceptional. There is no credible evidence that attempts deliberately to contrive a change of this kind (e.g. prayer, ‘ex-gay’ programs, ‘conversion therapy’) are successful, and there is evidence that they are potentially harmful. Even where no positive and enduring harm is done, the inevitable waste of time, and often also of money, constitutes sufficient condemnation. Furthermore, since homosexuality (or ‘same-sex attraction’, as some prefer to call it) is not an illness, disorder or defect, it does not need correcting. Therefore, no supposed therapy or other procedure purporting to change sexual orientation should ever be promoted to minors.”

Why bother with a complex argument like yours, when a simple one like the above will do?

I think she is right–that much of the profession is not legitimate. But jumping to the stance that every person who seeks chiropractic has the same issue, that chiropractic is one thing, that every practitioner does the same thing and has the same outcome, etc. is such a vast simplification and generalization as to render the judgement more fraudulent then the alleged fraud.

My daughter lost her grip in her right hand. We did the M.D. routine; imaging; the whole 9 yards. No improvement. We visited a chiropractor who fixed it in five minutes. We returned to M.D.–who could not acknowledge the chiropractor had done anything.

The MD’s dogma, the MD’s profession, the MD’s public fight—was more important than the patient.

Why not argue something like the following: “Any attempts to change our thoughts, attractions or behavior around sexuality are complex. Just as there are many valid reasons to seek some kind of change–or seek therapeutic support–there are many occasions in which it is harmful. Some persons have a range of attractions and behaviors and could make great use of effective mental health professionals to help them sort out desires and choices. But there is also a very vulnerable population of gay adolescents who are very motivated to seek some type of ‘reparative counseling’ because they feel they are very “different,” that they can’t change, and that they are worthless because of that. This group is so vulnerable that we believe any promotion of reparative therapy to minors is wrong and ought be removed; unless those who are practicing and promoting such therapy very clearly and explicitly delineate for whom it is appropriate. After all, every prescription drug that is a proven life-saver must still delineate all the ways in which it can harm or kill.”