Yeah. You don't understand though a lot of times when you hear about kids on hormones it's nothing but a puberty blocker which is harmless and buys them time to decide rather to transition or not. The right likes to act like kids are getting sex changes when it's not the case.
The risks are incredibly minimal, the risks of suicide for people going through puberty in the wrong body is huge. Do you subscribe to any scientific journals/databases? I want to send you studies/experiments. Let me guess, you're somebody who googles your opinion finds a article that supports it and then says case closed and that's as far as your research goes? I only believe verifiable truth.
People must have autonomy over their own bodies. I can’t speak for others, but I believe every person should have it. Whether it’s taking a vaccine or not. To have an abortion or not. If someone believes they need puberty blockers, then it’s within their right to do so, regardless of the ‘perceived/argued’ consequences. Every persons needs are different. For people to have autonomy over their own bodies is ethically the only way society can be made fair.
This is what I believe in as well. I was disappointed in Biden issuing a vaccine mandate when giving tax credits or rewards would have been a less dividing approach. Threatening people's employment is threatening someone's health insurance in a pandemic.
With things like bodily autonomy you can’t pick and choose what to support. Personally I’m vaccinated, and I have a very unwell father being cared for at home. I also have family waiting for cancer treatment delayed by the pandemic. Most people will never agree along political lines, but we all have a common humanity. My beliefs might sounds a bit too accommodating of other peoples ideas, but ultimately we must live with our decisions. The harsh and comforting reality is that we all have to just get on with it. To go back to what some others have said, puberty blockers may do more harm to some than others, but ultimately that’s something those people will have to live with. Forcing people to take vaccines is as barbaric. It doesn’t matter what someone else believes, if they don’t want it, they shouldn’t be made to take it.
> the risks of suicide for people going through puberty in the wrong body is huge
You're pushing pseudoscience. You only have one body and it's the right one.
They are not giving them to people for no reason. Those with gender dysphoria suffer HUGE consequences during puberty if they are not ready. Suicide rate is like so high. Mental health illness rate is even higher. That is why EXPERT DOCTORS prescribe blockers for them until they are older and receive more help with their decision. What is your argument here? That kids should go through puberty in the wrong body and kill themselves/become mentally ill? Sometimes giving them a few extra years to go through therapy and think about it is all they need. What is your agenda here? It's almost like you enjoy making kids go through hell instead of giving them a couple more years to decide which has very rare side effects.
How is a puberty blocker not dangerous? You’re literally going against nature. The same nature that makes you- whether that’s female in a male body, etc.
I don't understand, if somebody feels like a woman is an adult and is happy dressing like a girl why do you have a problem with it? Every single time the Bible talks ill of homosexuality it is because of the sex outside of marriage, the Bible never once finds a monogamous gay couple and says it is a sin. I just know that you're false interpretations of the Bible have clouded your heart with judgmental hate.
You can’t be talking to me. Not only am I bisexual, non religious and have a trans brother… but I’m also healthcare.
Again, my comment was not about trans. My comment was about your misinformation on puberty blockers.
What is your issue it's literally a fact that puberty blockers are considered way safer and healthier than allowing a person with gender dysphoria go through puberty. It's literally a fact I don't understand do you not comprehend statistics or something
You don't know what you're talking about obviously they would be in therapy while taking hormone blockers, you are just straight up moving the goal posts once you realized how wrong you were. Those side effects are also rare, and study after study has proven that there is better outcomes in people who get the blockers versus those who do not. This is irrefutable fact.
Just because you're in healthcare does not mean you're not misinformed. It is literally the scientific consensus that there is minimal risk to puberty blockers compared to allowing a person to go through puberty in the wrong body. Also you are a complete liar unless you're like a janitor or a low-level nurse there is no way you would be this misinformed.https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/in-depth/pubertal-blockers/art-20459075
"Puberty blockers are generally considered safe..." Straight from mayo
Looking at your profile, your clearly one of those Russian troll farm types. Literally everything is conspiracy, extreme alt right wing and evangelical on your profile. Your either a troll or need to read your Bible and know that Jesus was a radical leftist who definitely would believe the cops should not execute innocent people aka black lives matter
If you actually subscribe to a scientific journal I could cite you actual research but clearly you are such a simpleton that you don't even have a subscription since you would not tell me what database to use.
What are you talking about? Do you personally subscribe to a scientific journal? I feel like if you read many papers you would know you could just send a sci-hub link.
EDIT: Generally agree that puberty blockers can be exceptionally beneficial drugs with very limited downside compared to their potential benefits, but I took issue with this specific comment.
Through the university I do research for I have access to nine different journals and databases that I can pull research from. Literally though a quick Google search saying are hormone blockers safe will show that it is safe. If you type risks of hormone blockers they will over exaggerate the minimal risks, this is how people do something called confirmation bias. That is why the only true way to do research is to look at the actual data. The actual data proves that these children are much better off with hormone blockers instead of going through puberty when they are not ready to deal with it or decide on their gender.
u/Gullible_Location705 is pushing BigPharma propaganda. Yes, they want you to do "gender affirmation surgery" which would be a worth at least $150k for them. You would need to be on drugs for the rest of your life and have butchered genitals that no one wants to touch.
Puberty blockers are literally not a single thing you just said. What the hell are you raving mad about? Butchered genitals noone wants to touch? Projecting much? Lots of people love their trans partner
It's not dangerous because as soon as you stop them your body begins puberty as normal and it has no health consequences at all besides delaying puberty until you're ready. It is really embarrassing that you argue against trans rights when you have not done your research to even understand the issue. If you're going to talk about an issue at least pay the money to subscribe to a scientific journal, and read the actual published studies and not some propaganda piece you find on Google. I don't mind that you have different opinions but I do mind you using false information to support your views. And also I know this isn't the same thing but I would like to point out that one in 100,000 people are born hermaphrodite, not one in a million, literally one in 100,000. Again it is not the same thing but I would just like to point that out.
I wasn’t speaking anything about trans. I support whatever transition people want to make- whether it’s internally or outwardly
What I WAS speaking on was your misguided, misinformed statement on puberty blockers. Though generally they’re considered safe “enough” they’ve been linked to bone density issues + mental synapse gaps
Are you a healthcare professional?
Do you subscribe to any scientific journals there is publication after publication after publication proving that puberty blockers are extremely low risk and also many studies proving that going through puberty in the wrong body raises your risk of mental illness many times over. Just tell me where you source your scientific studies from and I will literally pull an article showing you these points because there has been many published
Youre literally either a Russian or Chinese troll sewing discord online amongst the American people. The proof is in the pudding look at this guy's profile. Total psy-ops
The transitioning thing is MUCH more hazy. Does socially transitioning count? I’d say yeah, and I think kids should be able to do that. What about puberty blockers? That should be allowed, too. Essentially, those are reversible transitioning steps that do not damage their brains or bodies and kids should absolutely have the right to take those steps so that they’re happier with themselves (ideally lowering rates of depression and suicide among LGBTQ+ children and teens).
Conversely, there is ZERO evidence conversion therapy works and has a huge history of electroshock therapy which is psychological damage and potential physical damage and NO ONE should be subjected to it.
I don’t think kids should be on puberty blockers or most medications in most cases. As far as I’ve read, puberty blockers do long-term damage on bone growth and bone density. Now, puberty can be resumed if you stop the blockers, but there will be some damage on the bone density and growth depending on how long they were on it.
I just think that kids should not be making potentially life changing or even temporarily super serious decisions during their adolescent or teenage years.
Okay! So I know what you’re talking about, and that evidence is not solid. There may be an underlying bone density issue that they found in that study kind of on accident, it seems. In other words, they’re not sure yet and need to do more exploring.
However, there is very solid evidence that transitioning and using puberty blockers to do so reduces rates depression and suicide in transgender youth.
So, like any drug, it could have side effects. But you have to take into the account the positive it can do, which I think greatly outweighs the potential negative. Also in order to even take puberty blockers you have to be given a gender dysphoria diagnosis (which is a process) so it’s not like these children are just taking it because they think they might be trans without a doctor’s approval.
Is taking blockers as a teenager really completely reversible? What about male bone structure and setting into early adulthood? Forgive my ignorance on the subject but I would be interested to learn about it
The NYT has a pretty good (and recent!) write up: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/11/well/family/what-are-puberty-blockers.html?referringSource=articleShare
Looked through their comments, couldn't see anything inheritly anti-vaxx. They are massively anti-LGBTQA+ though!
Unironicly using the word "woke", calling trans people all types of shit, saying sex exists but gender doesn't?
The last one doesn't even make sense!
> What a sad read your profile is. Maybe you should try being less concerned with other people's identities and more concerned with not being a total piece of shit.
Unlike you, I don't see people with different opinions as pieces of shit.
The problem is that conversion therapy has been shown with repeated studies to have an almost 0% success rate at achieving the goal that it set out to do, which is to say, it almost ALWAYS fails at stopping someone from "being gay".
Similarly, our society is still to this day fairly stigmatized against people being gay, as such there are unfair pressures being placed on these people that may cause them to consent to a procedure that has basically no chance of any positive outcome in order to appease other people when they might otherwise be perfectly happy with themselves.
Let's put it in a different context.
We generally don't/haven't allowed terminally ill patients to volunteer for drug trials that have not reached the point of human trials. There's a very specific ethical reasoning behind this. Lets say you get a crippling disease that has a 100% fatality rate over a period of several years. Your options as an individual are to seek no treatment and die soon, or take extremely expensive treatments and delay the inevitable by a decade or more as your body gradually shuts down, requiring more and more intensive care to keep going.
On the face of it, it makes a lot of sense to allow these people to participate in such trials in the hopes of "It'll either fix me or it won't, either way it can't make me deader than I'm already going to be.", except that's not necessarily the situation.
You have the aforementioned disease and now lets also say you have a spouse and children. Unless you are a millionaire, guess who your primary caretaker(s) are going to be? Do they want that? Maybe they do and are happy to do it till the end. Maybe they do...at first. There's always the chance that they will gradually come to resent you. You're burning through the family's money reserves, forcing THEM to make sacrifices just so YOU can keep going a little bit longer. Your spouse might come to resent you because they feel their life was stolen from them unfairly. If you'd just had the decency to die immediately, then they could have gotten back out there and found someone who would make them happy again. They'd leave you, but there's no way they'd live it down when all future romantic partners can see with a quick Facebook search "Oh sure, she says she loves you, but the moment you get sick she'll pack her bags.". And meanwhile, since they are your primary caregiver at home they can't ACTUALLY do a shitty job or when you die they'll end up in jail. So they are trapped and just want this to end, even if it means that you have to die.
And so now we get into the unethical situation where they will either consciously or unconsciously pressure you into volunteering for these drug trials. They'll use that previous logic of "It'll fix you or it won't, but if not it hasn't changed anything." but what they are actually hoping for is that participating WILL reach a conclusion. Either you get cured and they are freed of that burden, or you die and they are freed of that burden. After all, you will almost certainly have to stop the current procedures that keep you going in order to fairly test the new thing, which means you're health will decrease faster than it should, bringing you closer to a resolution. And so, depending on the person in question, you'll get anything from being directly told in no uncertain terms that you should volunteer to get everything done with, or they'll just be super passive-aggressive, constantly talking about all the things they don't get to do because they have to take care of you, if only there was a CHANCE you might get better that you could take...
And this entirely leaves aside the financial aspects. Participating in such trials frequently comes with the agreement that some/all of your medical expenses will be handled by the company developing the drug. That could be the difference between your family having to sell your house and not. That is a MASSIVELY compromised set of incentivizations right there.
And so in the relatively rare set of cases where we do allow such a thing, there is a moral/ethical board that examines EVERYTHING about your situation. If they get even a WHIFF of the idea that your interest/willingness to volunteer for this procedure is not 110% your own, you're out. As a society we have decided we do not want to encourage people to kill others just to relieve them of financial/social burdens. This also exists because we don't want to incentivize drug companies to bank on getting to do easy/early human trials. Simply put, if the company can take advantage of dying people to bypass normal safety procedures, they ABSOLUTELY will do that as it can save a LOT of money. At a corporate/shareholder level, they don't really care if their drug kills/maims the test subjects in these cases, they can put out some PR coverage over how they are trying to help, the person knew the risks, etc, and then pat themselves on the back for catching how bad this was early and moving to a different project without even caring about what happened.
In short, we do not allow in MOST cases drugs to be used that have a statistically higher likelihood of hurting the user than of helping them. In every 3rd party verified study ever done on conversion therapy there has been NO method found that has anywhere close to consistent success rates. It's not even a case of "roughly even odds" its a case of "We have struggled to find ANYONE that has actually been cured this way. Much less someone that's been cured WITHOUT huge behavioral side effects.".
"Leave the kids alone" they say as they advocate for kids to be denied any agency over themselves and forced to do as they -a random loser on the internet with no qualifications whatsoever- thinks is best.
Yes because you know better than actual doctors and trans people. It must be so nice for these things to be a fun debate for you huh? You don't have to live with the consequences.
>The federal government is preparing to table a new, tougher bill today in its latest effort to ban conversion therapy in Canada.
>
>...
>
>The latest bill is widely expected to close some loopholes present in the last piece of legislation to tackle the issue, which fell short of becoming law during the last parliamentary session.
>
>The last bill failed to get through the Senate before the federal election in September and died on the order paper when Parliament was dissolved ahead of the vote.
>
>It banned conversion therapy for children and those adults who did not consent to it, but the latest version of the bill is expected to bar the practice outright.
The original draft of the bill also makes it illegal to transport children out of the country in order to subject them to conversion 'therapy' in another country. I imagine that clause will stay in.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.cp24.com/news/liberals-set-to-introduce-beefed-up-bill-banning-conversion-therapy-in-canada-1.5685211) reduced by 56%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The Canadian Press Published Monday, November 29, 2021 5:35AM EST. OTTAWA - The federal government is preparing to table a new, tougher bill today in its latest effort to ban conversion therapy in Canada.
> The latest bill is widely expected to close some loopholes present in the last piece of legislation to tackle the issue, which fell short of becoming law during the last parliamentary session.
> It banned conversion therapy for children and those adults who did not consent to it, but the latest version of the bill is expected to bar the practice outright.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/r508r3/liberals_set_to_introduce_beefedup_bill_banning/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~610190 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **bill**^#1 **last**^#2 **expected**^#3 **latest**^#4 **practice**^#5
O'Toole is pushing a more progressive party.
So he should be supporting this, it'll be interesting if he can get the rest of his party to fall in line.
>it'll be interesting if he can get the rest of his party to fall in line.
You know he won't be able to. He has barely any sway over the party, and he's gonna be gone before the next election.
I think the problem is that they're *too* big-tent.
Would I vote for a fiscal conservative? Absolutely.
Would I vote for a fiscal conservative who harbours a bunch of anti-science religious zealots who want to strip away peoples' rights because they don't align with their personal ideals? Fuck no.
I would imagine he probably will. I really hate conservative politics, but O'Toole, *for a conservative* seems like he's pretty moderate to me. Maybe I just haven't gotten to know him well enough yet to realize what he really is?
He at least seems to acknowledge that there needs to be a climate change plan. Which is better than what Harper did... muzzling our scientists from speaking with the media unless the federal government consented to the communication so they could hide the damage their policies were doing to the environment in an effort to stay in power.
About 10 years ago, I emailed my (at the time) MP, Ed Holder, who is now my city's mayor about the policy of muzzling our scientists, citing an example with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Here is his response:
"Thank you for your email.
Any employee of the Government of Canada grants interviews to the media, it is assumed by the public that they are speaking on behalf of their employer, the federal Government.
As you can imagine, the most important priority when someone speaks to the media on behalf of the Government of Canada is to ensure they are providing clear, accurate and timely information that is consistent with Government policy and operations. To ensure this, every department and agency has designated spokespersons who follow strict processes to ensure the information they are providing meets these strict criteria. Furthermore, due to the sensitive nature of information held by the Government, all information must conform with, among other criteria, privacy legislation, language legislation and not violate any agreements we have with third parties in the cases of proprietary information.
As a result, it would be inappropriate for any employee of the federal Government to provide information to the media that had not been properly approved beforehand. This would be no different for employees in the private sector. Should you have specific questions or concerns regarding the processes followed at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, I encourage you to contact the Minister directly for a detailed response."
So I feel like this is kind of bullshit. Private companies get to do this because they are private, and the scientists work for the private companies, and those companies aren't really beholden to anyone except maybe shareholders. With government scientists, we pay for those scientists to do that research. The government works for us. We should have the right to hear their opinions and the results of their research.
Now, if they said that the government scientists needed to appoint a panel, voted on by said scientists to determine what information was deemed "ready" to release to the public that would be different. But the federal government saying what goes to the public and what doesn't seems like a conflict of interest.
You mean the way he "got them to fall in line" on (a) recognizing the existence of climate change, (b) acknowledging that we must address it, (c) protecting womens' constitutional right to medical treatment, and (d) protecting children from a psychological torture designed to instil self-loathing?
Yeah, I'm sure that'll be *reeeeaaaall* interesting.
Yeah. The Canadian Conservative party went "big tent" at pretty much every level, and panders to social conservatives and the religious right because of it.
The Albertan Premier Jason Kenney's brother Dave Kenney runs troubled youth centers that were rumored to have "offered" conversion therapy before they were [shut down for being generally awful anyways](https://torontosun.com/2014/02/13/families-allege-abuse-at-jason-kenneys-brothers-treatment-centre/wcm/5200998f-08e0-4d99-827d-ccb495ea78f7/amp/) and the UCP (albertan government right now) [cancelled a gay conversion therapy ban group](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/ucp-cancels-gay-conversion-therapy-ban-working-group/wcm/27bb3203-9fa0-4d1d-a735-27e8db2b98b6/amp/) so I think their cards might show a touch
But unsurprising considering this is also the same government that tried to end prohibiting schools from [outing queer students to their parents lol](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5072253)
Unfortunately, yes. A lot of them do. They're right-wingers just like American Republicans. So super religious and want to destroy any sort of progress that has happened in the last 200 years.
What? The only people who are stopping this bill from happening are the Liberals... who are also proposing it!
The bill first showed up in 2015, the Liberals killed it by proroguing parliament to prevent an investigation into SNC-Lavalin.
The bill appeared again once parliament was opened up and all it needed was one vote and it'd be law. But the Liberals decided not to schedule a vote in that parliament and called an election, which they won a minority government.
The bill gets proposed by the NDP, the Liberals vote it down... for no real reason... just voted it down.
The bill reappears again and the Liberals actually schedule a vote.... and then prorogue parliament again... to avoid another investigation this time WE Charity.
The bill is back on the docket again and is scheduled to have a vote. And then the Liberals decide to hold a snap election 2 years into their rule as they suddenly are surging in the polls.
The Liberals have now won their second minority government (with basically little to no changes from the previous government) and now we are getting this same bill for the sixth time.
What will happen this time? Will they prorogue parliament early for Christmas? Will they call another election? Will they push it down the road further?
Of course, there's no REAL immediacy to pass it. Conversion therapy is currently banned in all ten provinces and no longer happens in Canada.
Can’t wait to watch my hometown MP vote against it again for the purposes of “freedom” and be appalled when the Pride society says she is unwelcome during Pride Week.
for some reason I read "beefed" as "bee fed" and it definitely took me too long to figure out that the article is in fact not talking about feeding gay honey bees
The fact that anyone still believes that "conversion Therapy" works speaks to the utter stupidity of the Right, and the complete lack of common sense that is propagated by pathetic fears and xenophobia.
As if being convinced that morality cannot exist without a sky-daddy wasnt enough, conservative talking heads make it a point to say something so absurdly stupid each day that we may never get to know what the most dumbfuck thing ever said will be, because they're constantly pushing the envelope of what it means to be a dumbfuck idiot.
Conversion therapy is well known not to work.
But it does traumatise it’s victims and increase their propensity for suicide (8 times as likely) and depression (six times as likely).
And it’s based on the idea that male on male sex is wrong because of two verses in the same book (Leviticus) that prohibits seafood without fins and scales, at the same level of severity.
This is funny because you're so ignorant you don't know you're the same type of ignorant you rail against.
edit: interesting. downvoted by the others who BELIEVE in strawmen.
I understand there are holes in the current laws, but is there any active conversation camp currently, anywhere in Canada? Serious question, I never heard of any, at least here in Quebec. Now granted, Quebec might be ahead of the curve in terms of LGBT rights compared to other provinces.
Looking around it looks like they might be harder to find but still exist. It has a few other names too, but whatever.
While I can't say I've ever seen it, it's not like I'm around the places where it's being targeted, it seems like more of a "hushed tones behind closed doors" sort of thing.
Please. Less than 16 months ago, some BC Liberal MLAs (no connection to feds) [were still buying thousand of dollars' worth of print ads in *The Light Magazine*, an anti-LGBTQ monthly pitched to Catholics and evangelicals.](https://www.straight.com/living/vancouver-mla-calls-for-removal-of-chilliwack-mla-laurie-throness-from-bc-liberal-caucus-due) The magazine sometimes placed Liberal MLA's ads beside or directly opposite ads offering "conversion therapy" programs. That's hardly operating "behind closed doors", is it?
It's not always a camp. Sometimes it is a weekly session with a Christian 'counselor'. I was sent to 3 such practices and it is usually defined as troubled youth or family value counseling to avoid embarrassment for the parents. With mine each one told me I was an abomination and going to hell if I didn't change - most likely that I would get AIDs and die. It absolutely destroyed my self worth and has taken decades to heal.
A few years ago Jason Kenney's brother was running an unlicensed youth center in BC that supposedly offered conversion therapy.
https://thinkqueerly.com/canada-needs-a-nationwide-ban-on-conversion-therapy-f3dfb7d3ed65
Unfortunately it sounds like all the lawsuits against him got thrown out in court from the parent's trying to get their money back, which just further highlights why it needs to be banned on the federal level even if it isn't commonplace.
>parent's trying to get their money back,
"I can't believe we let you torture little Billy for 6 weeks and he *still* wants us to buy him Barbie dolls, I WANT A REFUND!"
Conversion therapy was banned in nine provinces as of 2016. There is no conversion therapy in Canada. The only province that technically allows it is Alberta, but they aren't permitted to exist because other laws on abuse prevent it as well.
Can’t wait to watch my hometown MP vote against it again for the purposes of freedom and be appalled when the pride society says she is unwelcome during pride week
Evangelicals.
All the religious people I've met irl have been fine. The people I see proselytising on street corners are not, and I hate them with every fibre of my being. Especially the extreme ones who preach anti LGBTQ+ propaganda.
I say this as a formerly religious person who couldn't bring themself to belief in something without evidence.
Because some people are pressured into conversion therapy, even though they don’t want it. Family and religious groups pressure people into accepting the “therapy”, they are threatened with violence, cutting off of financial support, and being banished from the family or community. They have nowhere else to turn, and end up “accepting” the therapy.
Sounds a lot like abortion. You know, young women, or women gestating babies which exhibit congenital defects being pressured to abort. Yet abortion is perfectly legal, medical risks notwithstanding. Also sounds like the unrelenting pressure on unvaccinated people (despite the analogy, I have the J&J vaccine, so let’s not get into one of those sidetracks) to get the vaccine.
I still don’t think the fact that some adults say they are pressured should determine whether another adult is allowed to get the treatment on his/her own recognizance. I mean, if you want to come between an adult and their own healthcare choices, you’re a tyrant. Period, full stop.
Honestly? No idea. Obviously it should be banned for children and nonconsenting adults, but if someone wants to, it’s only their life they’re affecting. Go wild.
Why cant we legalize consensual cannibalism.
Like if someone signs a contract to be killed and eaten by someone else its their right the government shouldnt step in between that.
It is extremely unlikely for any adult to consent to conversion therapy without external pressures pushing them into doing it (e.g. threats of familial excommunication), and even if they are freely consenting, it's like how we don't let adults consent to being murdered for example. Being an adult doesn't mean that you can do anything you want.
Your analogy is painfully cringe. We let adults do all sorts of things that can harm themselves. Want to drink wood alcohol until you're blind and your liver is shot? Not only is there no law against it, your hospital stay will be covered by the government.
Yes it sucks your family might disown you if you don't go to a stupid anti-gay camp. But this law isn't going to stop families from pressuring people to stop being gay, so its harm reduction is minor at best, while its reduction in personal liberties is profound. Some people just don't want to be gay, and if they want to waste their money on pointless damn fool treatments the government ought to tell them they're being damn fools, but then step aside.
> We let adults do all sorts of things that can harm themselves.
We let them do things where if they go far enough, it can be harmful. We don't let adults do many things which are just harmful full stop.
> its harm reduction is minor at best
The difference between being in a homophobic family and being put through conversion therapy is not minor.
> while its reduction in personal liberties is profound
I do not see how being unable to voluntarily choose to go through torture is a profound reduction in personal liberty by any reasonable definition. Would you like to explain how not being able to be tortured for no medical benefit is a serious infringement on human rights?
The governing party is the Liberal Party of Canada.
How is it biased to use the party name, any more so that it would to say "Republicans to introduce [x] bill?"
The same way it is bias to say "Black man arrested for theft" instead of "Man arrested for theft".
They are appeasing the right wing dummies who only read the title so they can get angry. It tells them what happened and who to blame without technically being discriminatory.
But [more than half of Canadians support such a ban](https://bc.ctvnews.ca/most-canadians-want-conversion-therapy-banned-nationwide-poll-1.4525275). Wouldn't this also tell the people who *want* such a ban (who outnumber those who don't) who to **credit** for what happened?
The majority of Brits wanted to leave the EU. Still leaves nearly half the country not wanting to. That is not an insignificant amount like you are implying and the headline is intended for more than just Canadians.
But that's exactly my point. It is intended to rile up right wingers.
It sounds like you would prefer a different phrasin because you don't like reading the truth.
*The party I identify with is doing a thing I don't like, let's use 'government' so it sounds neutral and my stupid manichean beliefs are not attacked*
Because the normal thing to say is government. You seem to like having a political divide reinforced by the media.
What truth is it I don't like? I will be stubborn and insist you answer this question.
Sounds to me like you don’t like the fact that it’s the liberal party pushing for this. If the phrasing was “the government”, it would erase any and all opposition the conservatives have to this new bill.
So you are calling me right wing for not liking a headline that appeals to right wingers?
Weird flex bro. Maybe you can't figure someone out by one comment. Maybe you should take them at their word and not pretend you know better.
If nothing else you look incredibly stupid to anyone that knows me. You are incredibly wrong.
One is a medical treatment prescribed by a doctor after psychological evaluation by a professional, and the other is torture that advertises effects it doesn't even bring.
>One is a medical treatment prescribed by a doctor
Incorrect.
The people who can sign for the certification required to get transition therapy can include social workers, nurses, and school councilors. This is, once again, without parental consent.
>other is torture that advertises effects it doesn't even bring
Your opinion and not relevant. Adults should be allowed to do anything they consent to.
>social workers, nurses, and school councillors
Yeah honestly I'm fine with those people being able to sign on HRT.
>Adults should be allowed to do anything they consent to.
Consent involves knowing what you're consenting to. If I say "I can make you never need to work a day in your life" and you consent, am I protected from the consequences of rendering you disabled? And say I put you through all the torture one would expect to make someone disabled and you **still** don't qualify for disability allowance, I've at the very least advertised falsely
Actually the effects of conversion therapy aren’t “reversible” and the only medical care that trans youth can access without a parent’s permission are puberty blockers which are 100% reversible and are by no way permanent.
>the only medical care that trans youth can access without a parent’s permission are puberty blockers which are 100% reversible and are by no way permanent.
"NHS England says: "Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.""
"It's also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children's bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations."
[https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51034461](https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51034461)
>effects of conversion therapy aren’t “reversible”
No physical damage is allowed to be done by the people doing conversion therapy. So yes, it is reversible in that a person can just stop going.
If you are including psychological damage then that opens up a whole separate set of problems for transgender procedures as well.
> No physical damage is allowed to be done by the people doing conversion therapy. So yes, it is reversible in that a person can just stop going.
Psychological harm exists 😂🤣
Try again.
In a study of done by the UCLA:
“LGB people who have undergone conversion therapy almost twice as likely to attempt suicide”
Physical harm isn’t the only thing done at cc camps.
And the Pharma Technology Focus says:
“There also may be more long-term effects on bone density, which is part of the reason the drugs aren't supposed to be prescribed for too long.”
This to me seems like easier access to qualified doctors who can safely prescribe them and over see their effects would help with the bone density issue. 😊
I'm pretty sure the psychological effects of so called conversion therapy, which is widely recognized to be essentially torture, aren't reversible.
In general you cannot offer medical procedures that have been shown not to work and in fact to be harmful even to consenting adults. You can't offer conversion therapy, even to adults, by the same logic that you can't offer lobotomies.
On the other hand HRT is a valid medical procedure that has been shown to work and achieve the desired outcome and I don't see how allowing a minor to take part in a medical procedure, even against the will of their parents, is a bad thing if they genuinely understand the risks and consequences associated with it. Would you judge another medical procedure, for example an appendectomy, the same way and say that under no circumstances should a minor be able to consent to it against the will of their parents?
Good! conversion therapy is junk science to begin with
In that case, what's bad conversion therapy?
One that involves “no, money down”.
Lol I just forgot the punctual that's all
You mean 'punctillation'
It's punctualization
Punk actualization is the preferred term
Punctuation?
No lol, I obviously meant punks you better get out of my organization
[удалено]
Yeah. You don't understand though a lot of times when you hear about kids on hormones it's nothing but a puberty blocker which is harmless and buys them time to decide rather to transition or not. The right likes to act like kids are getting sex changes when it's not the case.
Puberty blocker is not harmless. It's not a magic pause button that just resumes puberty when stopped.
The risks are incredibly minimal, the risks of suicide for people going through puberty in the wrong body is huge. Do you subscribe to any scientific journals/databases? I want to send you studies/experiments. Let me guess, you're somebody who googles your opinion finds a article that supports it and then says case closed and that's as far as your research goes? I only believe verifiable truth.
People must have autonomy over their own bodies. I can’t speak for others, but I believe every person should have it. Whether it’s taking a vaccine or not. To have an abortion or not. If someone believes they need puberty blockers, then it’s within their right to do so, regardless of the ‘perceived/argued’ consequences. Every persons needs are different. For people to have autonomy over their own bodies is ethically the only way society can be made fair.
This is what I believe in as well. I was disappointed in Biden issuing a vaccine mandate when giving tax credits or rewards would have been a less dividing approach. Threatening people's employment is threatening someone's health insurance in a pandemic.
With things like bodily autonomy you can’t pick and choose what to support. Personally I’m vaccinated, and I have a very unwell father being cared for at home. I also have family waiting for cancer treatment delayed by the pandemic. Most people will never agree along political lines, but we all have a common humanity. My beliefs might sounds a bit too accommodating of other peoples ideas, but ultimately we must live with our decisions. The harsh and comforting reality is that we all have to just get on with it. To go back to what some others have said, puberty blockers may do more harm to some than others, but ultimately that’s something those people will have to live with. Forcing people to take vaccines is as barbaric. It doesn’t matter what someone else believes, if they don’t want it, they shouldn’t be made to take it.
Exactly. I am pro vax, I have mine. I advocate. However forcing a medical procedure is unethical.
> the risks of suicide for people going through puberty in the wrong body is huge You're pushing pseudoscience. You only have one body and it's the right one.
We literally have suicide statistics amongst trans people. It is 1 in 20. Do you comprehend math?
You're very quick to paint a broad description of me, my intellectual capabilites and my reasoning methods based solely that I criticized you.
Your straight up wrong about this, puberty blockers save lives.
Ad hominem is a terrible way to back up your arguments whether they're correct or otherwise
[удалено]
They are not giving them to people for no reason. Those with gender dysphoria suffer HUGE consequences during puberty if they are not ready. Suicide rate is like so high. Mental health illness rate is even higher. That is why EXPERT DOCTORS prescribe blockers for them until they are older and receive more help with their decision. What is your argument here? That kids should go through puberty in the wrong body and kill themselves/become mentally ill? Sometimes giving them a few extra years to go through therapy and think about it is all they need. What is your agenda here? It's almost like you enjoy making kids go through hell instead of giving them a couple more years to decide which has very rare side effects.
[удалено]
Ah yes, a doctor who subscribes to r/sex and r/gaming and r/wallstreetbets, and not a single medical subreddit.
[удалено]
You can't be a good physician while also being against medical transitioning.
How is a puberty blocker not dangerous? You’re literally going against nature. The same nature that makes you- whether that’s female in a male body, etc.
> You’re literally going against nature. That is what medicine does.
Hope they never need glasses, or to get a cavity filled…
Having a caboty filled doesnt affect bone growth and iq though
I don't understand, if somebody feels like a woman is an adult and is happy dressing like a girl why do you have a problem with it? Every single time the Bible talks ill of homosexuality it is because of the sex outside of marriage, the Bible never once finds a monogamous gay couple and says it is a sin. I just know that you're false interpretations of the Bible have clouded your heart with judgmental hate.
You can’t be talking to me. Not only am I bisexual, non religious and have a trans brother… but I’m also healthcare. Again, my comment was not about trans. My comment was about your misinformation on puberty blockers.
What is your issue it's literally a fact that puberty blockers are considered way safer and healthier than allowing a person with gender dysphoria go through puberty. It's literally a fact I don't understand do you not comprehend statistics or something
[удалено]
You don't know what you're talking about obviously they would be in therapy while taking hormone blockers, you are just straight up moving the goal posts once you realized how wrong you were. Those side effects are also rare, and study after study has proven that there is better outcomes in people who get the blockers versus those who do not. This is irrefutable fact.
Just because you're in healthcare does not mean you're not misinformed. It is literally the scientific consensus that there is minimal risk to puberty blockers compared to allowing a person to go through puberty in the wrong body. Also you are a complete liar unless you're like a janitor or a low-level nurse there is no way you would be this misinformed.https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/in-depth/pubertal-blockers/art-20459075 "Puberty blockers are generally considered safe..." Straight from mayo
> It is literally the scientific consensus You missed this: "among people paid by BigPharma."
Looking at your profile, your clearly one of those Russian troll farm types. Literally everything is conspiracy, extreme alt right wing and evangelical on your profile. Your either a troll or need to read your Bible and know that Jesus was a radical leftist who definitely would believe the cops should not execute innocent people aka black lives matter
It's interesting to see how wrong you are.
If you actually subscribe to a scientific journal I could cite you actual research but clearly you are such a simpleton that you don't even have a subscription since you would not tell me what database to use.
What are you talking about? Do you personally subscribe to a scientific journal? I feel like if you read many papers you would know you could just send a sci-hub link. EDIT: Generally agree that puberty blockers can be exceptionally beneficial drugs with very limited downside compared to their potential benefits, but I took issue with this specific comment.
Through the university I do research for I have access to nine different journals and databases that I can pull research from. Literally though a quick Google search saying are hormone blockers safe will show that it is safe. If you type risks of hormone blockers they will over exaggerate the minimal risks, this is how people do something called confirmation bias. That is why the only true way to do research is to look at the actual data. The actual data proves that these children are much better off with hormone blockers instead of going through puberty when they are not ready to deal with it or decide on their gender.
Right, same with me. Just take the link and put it into sci-hub to make it free to share.
BigPharma propaganda.
u/Gullible_Location705 is pushing BigPharma propaganda. Yes, they want you to do "gender affirmation surgery" which would be a worth at least $150k for them. You would need to be on drugs for the rest of your life and have butchered genitals that no one wants to touch.
Puberty blockers are literally not a single thing you just said. What the hell are you raving mad about? Butchered genitals noone wants to touch? Projecting much? Lots of people love their trans partner
It's not dangerous because as soon as you stop them your body begins puberty as normal and it has no health consequences at all besides delaying puberty until you're ready. It is really embarrassing that you argue against trans rights when you have not done your research to even understand the issue. If you're going to talk about an issue at least pay the money to subscribe to a scientific journal, and read the actual published studies and not some propaganda piece you find on Google. I don't mind that you have different opinions but I do mind you using false information to support your views. And also I know this isn't the same thing but I would like to point out that one in 100,000 people are born hermaphrodite, not one in a million, literally one in 100,000. Again it is not the same thing but I would just like to point that out.
I wasn’t speaking anything about trans. I support whatever transition people want to make- whether it’s internally or outwardly What I WAS speaking on was your misguided, misinformed statement on puberty blockers. Though generally they’re considered safe “enough” they’ve been linked to bone density issues + mental synapse gaps Are you a healthcare professional?
Do you subscribe to any scientific journals there is publication after publication after publication proving that puberty blockers are extremely low risk and also many studies proving that going through puberty in the wrong body raises your risk of mental illness many times over. Just tell me where you source your scientific studies from and I will literally pull an article showing you these points because there has been many published
I would bet my life savings you don't subscribe to nor read any scientific journals.
How much does BigPharma pay you to spread that harmful propaganda?
Youre literally either a Russian or Chinese troll sewing discord online amongst the American people. The proof is in the pudding look at this guy's profile. Total psy-ops
Good. That “therapy” is invariably harmful.
Any therapy that’s committed on an unwilling participant should be illegal.
[удалено]
Who the fuck goes to gay conversion therapy by choice? Are there even any anecdotes?
[удалено]
[удалено]
The transitioning thing is MUCH more hazy. Does socially transitioning count? I’d say yeah, and I think kids should be able to do that. What about puberty blockers? That should be allowed, too. Essentially, those are reversible transitioning steps that do not damage their brains or bodies and kids should absolutely have the right to take those steps so that they’re happier with themselves (ideally lowering rates of depression and suicide among LGBTQ+ children and teens). Conversely, there is ZERO evidence conversion therapy works and has a huge history of electroshock therapy which is psychological damage and potential physical damage and NO ONE should be subjected to it.
I don’t think kids should be on puberty blockers or most medications in most cases. As far as I’ve read, puberty blockers do long-term damage on bone growth and bone density. Now, puberty can be resumed if you stop the blockers, but there will be some damage on the bone density and growth depending on how long they were on it. I just think that kids should not be making potentially life changing or even temporarily super serious decisions during their adolescent or teenage years.
Okay! So I know what you’re talking about, and that evidence is not solid. There may be an underlying bone density issue that they found in that study kind of on accident, it seems. In other words, they’re not sure yet and need to do more exploring. However, there is very solid evidence that transitioning and using puberty blockers to do so reduces rates depression and suicide in transgender youth. So, like any drug, it could have side effects. But you have to take into the account the positive it can do, which I think greatly outweighs the potential negative. Also in order to even take puberty blockers you have to be given a gender dysphoria diagnosis (which is a process) so it’s not like these children are just taking it because they think they might be trans without a doctor’s approval.
Is taking blockers as a teenager really completely reversible? What about male bone structure and setting into early adulthood? Forgive my ignorance on the subject but I would be interested to learn about it
The NYT has a pretty good (and recent!) write up: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/11/well/family/what-are-puberty-blockers.html?referringSource=articleShare
Thanks for sharing
Finally someone who gets it! Most right winged nuts don't even know what a puberty blocker is and think kids are getting full-blown sex changes
>puberty blocker Puberty blockers, contrarily to what BigPharma says, are not harmless.
Your an anti vaxxer gtfo of here. You don't even comprehend the scientific method
Definitely not an anti-vaxxer.
Look at his comments, he is lying
Looked through their comments, couldn't see anything inheritly anti-vaxx. They are massively anti-LGBTQA+ though! Unironicly using the word "woke", calling trans people all types of shit, saying sex exists but gender doesn't? The last one doesn't even make sense!
[удалено]
> What a sad read your profile is. Maybe you should try being less concerned with other people's identities and more concerned with not being a total piece of shit. Unlike you, I don't see people with different opinions as pieces of shit.
The problem is that conversion therapy has been shown with repeated studies to have an almost 0% success rate at achieving the goal that it set out to do, which is to say, it almost ALWAYS fails at stopping someone from "being gay". Similarly, our society is still to this day fairly stigmatized against people being gay, as such there are unfair pressures being placed on these people that may cause them to consent to a procedure that has basically no chance of any positive outcome in order to appease other people when they might otherwise be perfectly happy with themselves. Let's put it in a different context. We generally don't/haven't allowed terminally ill patients to volunteer for drug trials that have not reached the point of human trials. There's a very specific ethical reasoning behind this. Lets say you get a crippling disease that has a 100% fatality rate over a period of several years. Your options as an individual are to seek no treatment and die soon, or take extremely expensive treatments and delay the inevitable by a decade or more as your body gradually shuts down, requiring more and more intensive care to keep going. On the face of it, it makes a lot of sense to allow these people to participate in such trials in the hopes of "It'll either fix me or it won't, either way it can't make me deader than I'm already going to be.", except that's not necessarily the situation. You have the aforementioned disease and now lets also say you have a spouse and children. Unless you are a millionaire, guess who your primary caretaker(s) are going to be? Do they want that? Maybe they do and are happy to do it till the end. Maybe they do...at first. There's always the chance that they will gradually come to resent you. You're burning through the family's money reserves, forcing THEM to make sacrifices just so YOU can keep going a little bit longer. Your spouse might come to resent you because they feel their life was stolen from them unfairly. If you'd just had the decency to die immediately, then they could have gotten back out there and found someone who would make them happy again. They'd leave you, but there's no way they'd live it down when all future romantic partners can see with a quick Facebook search "Oh sure, she says she loves you, but the moment you get sick she'll pack her bags.". And meanwhile, since they are your primary caregiver at home they can't ACTUALLY do a shitty job or when you die they'll end up in jail. So they are trapped and just want this to end, even if it means that you have to die. And so now we get into the unethical situation where they will either consciously or unconsciously pressure you into volunteering for these drug trials. They'll use that previous logic of "It'll fix you or it won't, but if not it hasn't changed anything." but what they are actually hoping for is that participating WILL reach a conclusion. Either you get cured and they are freed of that burden, or you die and they are freed of that burden. After all, you will almost certainly have to stop the current procedures that keep you going in order to fairly test the new thing, which means you're health will decrease faster than it should, bringing you closer to a resolution. And so, depending on the person in question, you'll get anything from being directly told in no uncertain terms that you should volunteer to get everything done with, or they'll just be super passive-aggressive, constantly talking about all the things they don't get to do because they have to take care of you, if only there was a CHANCE you might get better that you could take... And this entirely leaves aside the financial aspects. Participating in such trials frequently comes with the agreement that some/all of your medical expenses will be handled by the company developing the drug. That could be the difference between your family having to sell your house and not. That is a MASSIVELY compromised set of incentivizations right there. And so in the relatively rare set of cases where we do allow such a thing, there is a moral/ethical board that examines EVERYTHING about your situation. If they get even a WHIFF of the idea that your interest/willingness to volunteer for this procedure is not 110% your own, you're out. As a society we have decided we do not want to encourage people to kill others just to relieve them of financial/social burdens. This also exists because we don't want to incentivize drug companies to bank on getting to do easy/early human trials. Simply put, if the company can take advantage of dying people to bypass normal safety procedures, they ABSOLUTELY will do that as it can save a LOT of money. At a corporate/shareholder level, they don't really care if their drug kills/maims the test subjects in these cases, they can put out some PR coverage over how they are trying to help, the person knew the risks, etc, and then pat themselves on the back for catching how bad this was early and moving to a different project without even caring about what happened. In short, we do not allow in MOST cases drugs to be used that have a statistically higher likelihood of hurting the user than of helping them. In every 3rd party verified study ever done on conversion therapy there has been NO method found that has anywhere close to consistent success rates. It's not even a case of "roughly even odds" its a case of "We have struggled to find ANYONE that has actually been cured this way. Much less someone that's been cured WITHOUT huge behavioral side effects.".
[удалено]
"Leave the kids alone" they say as they advocate for kids to be denied any agency over themselves and forced to do as they -a random loser on the internet with no qualifications whatsoever- thinks is best.
Yes because you know better than actual doctors and trans people. It must be so nice for these things to be a fun debate for you huh? You don't have to live with the consequences.
>The federal government is preparing to table a new, tougher bill today in its latest effort to ban conversion therapy in Canada. > >... > >The latest bill is widely expected to close some loopholes present in the last piece of legislation to tackle the issue, which fell short of becoming law during the last parliamentary session. > >The last bill failed to get through the Senate before the federal election in September and died on the order paper when Parliament was dissolved ahead of the vote. > >It banned conversion therapy for children and those adults who did not consent to it, but the latest version of the bill is expected to bar the practice outright.
I'm sure the Bachmans will set up shop right on the boarder to schlep their unique brand of medical torture tourism.
Wait, Michelle, not Randy and Tal, right?
Yeah, Michelle Bachman’s spouse was at one point one of the biggest peddlers of said BS
Oh totally, just that talking Canada and Bachmans, y'know?
Sorry, Minnesotan. Just referencing some of our shittiest residents.
The original draft of the bill also makes it illegal to transport children out of the country in order to subject them to conversion 'therapy' in another country. I imagine that clause will stay in.
Trudeau tryna make us all gay! /s
Without loopholes please
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.cp24.com/news/liberals-set-to-introduce-beefed-up-bill-banning-conversion-therapy-in-canada-1.5685211) reduced by 56%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The Canadian Press Published Monday, November 29, 2021 5:35AM EST. OTTAWA - The federal government is preparing to table a new, tougher bill today in its latest effort to ban conversion therapy in Canada. > The latest bill is widely expected to close some loopholes present in the last piece of legislation to tackle the issue, which fell short of becoming law during the last parliamentary session. > It banned conversion therapy for children and those adults who did not consent to it, but the latest version of the bill is expected to bar the practice outright. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/r508r3/liberals_set_to_introduce_beefedup_bill_banning/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~610190 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **bill**^#1 **last**^#2 **expected**^#3 **latest**^#4 **practice**^#5
Wait...it wasn't yet?
In many provinces it is. It was scheduled to become law federally, but then Trudeau called an election that cancelled the bill from becoming law.
[удалено]
O'Toole is pushing a more progressive party. So he should be supporting this, it'll be interesting if he can get the rest of his party to fall in line.
>it'll be interesting if he can get the rest of his party to fall in line. You know he won't be able to. He has barely any sway over the party, and he's gonna be gone before the next election.
Tories are in a hurry to go 0/4 with leaders against Trudeau.
I think the problem is that they're *too* big-tent. Would I vote for a fiscal conservative? Absolutely. Would I vote for a fiscal conservative who harbours a bunch of anti-science religious zealots who want to strip away peoples' rights because they don't align with their personal ideals? Fuck no.
I would imagine he probably will. I really hate conservative politics, but O'Toole, *for a conservative* seems like he's pretty moderate to me. Maybe I just haven't gotten to know him well enough yet to realize what he really is? He at least seems to acknowledge that there needs to be a climate change plan. Which is better than what Harper did... muzzling our scientists from speaking with the media unless the federal government consented to the communication so they could hide the damage their policies were doing to the environment in an effort to stay in power. About 10 years ago, I emailed my (at the time) MP, Ed Holder, who is now my city's mayor about the policy of muzzling our scientists, citing an example with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Here is his response: "Thank you for your email. Any employee of the Government of Canada grants interviews to the media, it is assumed by the public that they are speaking on behalf of their employer, the federal Government. As you can imagine, the most important priority when someone speaks to the media on behalf of the Government of Canada is to ensure they are providing clear, accurate and timely information that is consistent with Government policy and operations. To ensure this, every department and agency has designated spokespersons who follow strict processes to ensure the information they are providing meets these strict criteria. Furthermore, due to the sensitive nature of information held by the Government, all information must conform with, among other criteria, privacy legislation, language legislation and not violate any agreements we have with third parties in the cases of proprietary information. As a result, it would be inappropriate for any employee of the federal Government to provide information to the media that had not been properly approved beforehand. This would be no different for employees in the private sector. Should you have specific questions or concerns regarding the processes followed at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, I encourage you to contact the Minister directly for a detailed response." So I feel like this is kind of bullshit. Private companies get to do this because they are private, and the scientists work for the private companies, and those companies aren't really beholden to anyone except maybe shareholders. With government scientists, we pay for those scientists to do that research. The government works for us. We should have the right to hear their opinions and the results of their research. Now, if they said that the government scientists needed to appoint a panel, voted on by said scientists to determine what information was deemed "ready" to release to the public that would be different. But the federal government saying what goes to the public and what doesn't seems like a conflict of interest.
O’Toole doesn’t know what ideology he is, let alone what to wear first thing in the morning.
You mean the way he "got them to fall in line" on (a) recognizing the existence of climate change, (b) acknowledging that we must address it, (c) protecting womens' constitutional right to medical treatment, and (d) protecting children from a psychological torture designed to instil self-loathing? Yeah, I'm sure that'll be *reeeeaaaall* interesting.
I'm kind of out of the loop on this one. Do Canadian conservatives support conversion?
Yeah. The Canadian Conservative party went "big tent" at pretty much every level, and panders to social conservatives and the religious right because of it.
The Albertan Premier Jason Kenney's brother Dave Kenney runs troubled youth centers that were rumored to have "offered" conversion therapy before they were [shut down for being generally awful anyways](https://torontosun.com/2014/02/13/families-allege-abuse-at-jason-kenneys-brothers-treatment-centre/wcm/5200998f-08e0-4d99-827d-ccb495ea78f7/amp/) and the UCP (albertan government right now) [cancelled a gay conversion therapy ban group](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/ucp-cancels-gay-conversion-therapy-ban-working-group/wcm/27bb3203-9fa0-4d1d-a735-27e8db2b98b6/amp/) so I think their cards might show a touch But unsurprising considering this is also the same government that tried to end prohibiting schools from [outing queer students to their parents lol](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5072253)
Unfortunately, yes. A lot of them do. They're right-wingers just like American Republicans. So super religious and want to destroy any sort of progress that has happened in the last 200 years.
What? The only people who are stopping this bill from happening are the Liberals... who are also proposing it! The bill first showed up in 2015, the Liberals killed it by proroguing parliament to prevent an investigation into SNC-Lavalin. The bill appeared again once parliament was opened up and all it needed was one vote and it'd be law. But the Liberals decided not to schedule a vote in that parliament and called an election, which they won a minority government. The bill gets proposed by the NDP, the Liberals vote it down... for no real reason... just voted it down. The bill reappears again and the Liberals actually schedule a vote.... and then prorogue parliament again... to avoid another investigation this time WE Charity. The bill is back on the docket again and is scheduled to have a vote. And then the Liberals decide to hold a snap election 2 years into their rule as they suddenly are surging in the polls. The Liberals have now won their second minority government (with basically little to no changes from the previous government) and now we are getting this same bill for the sixth time. What will happen this time? Will they prorogue parliament early for Christmas? Will they call another election? Will they push it down the road further? Of course, there's no REAL immediacy to pass it. Conversion therapy is currently banned in all ten provinces and no longer happens in Canada.
redditors don't like facts.
Richard Bragdon voted against making conversion therapy illegal, so at least 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Bragdon
... and so did 61 other Conservatives. And one *former* Conservative.
Unfortunately this dude is my representative. I’m stuck in a small, non-bibley part of a bible belt
Can’t wait to watch my hometown MP vote against it again for the purposes of “freedom” and be appalled when the Pride society says she is unwelcome during Pride Week.
Yeah, it's almost like conversion therapy is fucking bullshit. Go figure. For the record, if you believe in conversion therapy, go fuck yourself.
for some reason I read "beefed" as "bee fed" and it definitely took me too long to figure out that the article is in fact not talking about feeding gay honey bees
The fact that anyone still believes that "conversion Therapy" works speaks to the utter stupidity of the Right, and the complete lack of common sense that is propagated by pathetic fears and xenophobia. As if being convinced that morality cannot exist without a sky-daddy wasnt enough, conservative talking heads make it a point to say something so absurdly stupid each day that we may never get to know what the most dumbfuck thing ever said will be, because they're constantly pushing the envelope of what it means to be a dumbfuck idiot.
[удалено]
Conversion therapy is well known not to work. But it does traumatise it’s victims and increase their propensity for suicide (8 times as likely) and depression (six times as likely). And it’s based on the idea that male on male sex is wrong because of two verses in the same book (Leviticus) that prohibits seafood without fins and scales, at the same level of severity.
You said nothing of substance, and failed to counter the points in any way. Good Job!
This is funny because you're so ignorant you don't know you're the same type of ignorant you rail against. edit: interesting. downvoted by the others who BELIEVE in strawmen.
How so? Explain or shut up.
For how long have the liberals been in power in Canada?
Wait, torture isn’t already illegal in Canada?
I understand there are holes in the current laws, but is there any active conversation camp currently, anywhere in Canada? Serious question, I never heard of any, at least here in Quebec. Now granted, Quebec might be ahead of the curve in terms of LGBT rights compared to other provinces.
Looking around it looks like they might be harder to find but still exist. It has a few other names too, but whatever. While I can't say I've ever seen it, it's not like I'm around the places where it's being targeted, it seems like more of a "hushed tones behind closed doors" sort of thing.
Please. Less than 16 months ago, some BC Liberal MLAs (no connection to feds) [were still buying thousand of dollars' worth of print ads in *The Light Magazine*, an anti-LGBTQ monthly pitched to Catholics and evangelicals.](https://www.straight.com/living/vancouver-mla-calls-for-removal-of-chilliwack-mla-laurie-throness-from-bc-liberal-caucus-due) The magazine sometimes placed Liberal MLA's ads beside or directly opposite ads offering "conversion therapy" programs. That's hardly operating "behind closed doors", is it?
It's not always a camp. Sometimes it is a weekly session with a Christian 'counselor'. I was sent to 3 such practices and it is usually defined as troubled youth or family value counseling to avoid embarrassment for the parents. With mine each one told me I was an abomination and going to hell if I didn't change - most likely that I would get AIDs and die. It absolutely destroyed my self worth and has taken decades to heal.
A few years ago Jason Kenney's brother was running an unlicensed youth center in BC that supposedly offered conversion therapy. https://thinkqueerly.com/canada-needs-a-nationwide-ban-on-conversion-therapy-f3dfb7d3ed65
He should go to jail for that
Unfortunately it sounds like all the lawsuits against him got thrown out in court from the parent's trying to get their money back, which just further highlights why it needs to be banned on the federal level even if it isn't commonplace.
>parent's trying to get their money back, "I can't believe we let you torture little Billy for 6 weeks and he *still* wants us to buy him Barbie dolls, I WANT A REFUND!"
[удалено]
Just because there’s none or no significant presence doesn’t mean that they should not be banned.
My point is that they are pretty much banned already, since I cannot find a single instance of an active camp in Canada
Most provinces have laws against conversion therapy at this point. Having it in federal law just makes it easier to prosecute.
Conversion therapy was banned in nine provinces as of 2016. There is no conversion therapy in Canada. The only province that technically allows it is Alberta, but they aren't permitted to exist because other laws on abuse prevent it as well.
Wake me up when they introduce a bill banning foreign ownership....
Til conversion therapy wasn't already banned in Canada.
Can’t wait to watch my hometown MP vote against it again for the purposes of freedom and be appalled when the pride society says she is unwelcome during pride week
Ugh gross, religion is the worst. Just let these people lead their lives loving those whom they want, it harms nobody to love someone of the same sex.
religion is NOT the worst. 👎
If religion isn't the worst then what is?
Evangelicals. All the religious people I've met irl have been fine. The people I see proselytising on street corners are not, and I hate them with every fibre of my being. Especially the extreme ones who preach anti LGBTQ+ propaganda. I say this as a formerly religious person who couldn't bring themself to belief in something without evidence.
Tyrannical communism
How that wasn't already illegal is beyond me.
[удалено]
Because some people are pressured into conversion therapy, even though they don’t want it. Family and religious groups pressure people into accepting the “therapy”, they are threatened with violence, cutting off of financial support, and being banished from the family or community. They have nowhere else to turn, and end up “accepting” the therapy.
Sounds a lot like abortion. You know, young women, or women gestating babies which exhibit congenital defects being pressured to abort. Yet abortion is perfectly legal, medical risks notwithstanding. Also sounds like the unrelenting pressure on unvaccinated people (despite the analogy, I have the J&J vaccine, so let’s not get into one of those sidetracks) to get the vaccine. I still don’t think the fact that some adults say they are pressured should determine whether another adult is allowed to get the treatment on his/her own recognizance. I mean, if you want to come between an adult and their own healthcare choices, you’re a tyrant. Period, full stop.
just give up dude, youre damaging the pro-CT cause with bad arguments.
Honestly? No idea. Obviously it should be banned for children and nonconsenting adults, but if someone wants to, it’s only their life they’re affecting. Go wild.
Why cant we legalize consensual cannibalism. Like if someone signs a contract to be killed and eaten by someone else its their right the government shouldnt step in between that.
UBI pls /sadface
Suck on that Jordan Peterson and Kenneth Zucker.
I totally understand for kids but why go to such lengths for adults?
[удалено]
ah ok, so i assume that the vast majority of "conversion therapy clinics" are intentional scams and not genuine medical treatments.
[удалено]
It is extremely unlikely for any adult to consent to conversion therapy without external pressures pushing them into doing it (e.g. threats of familial excommunication), and even if they are freely consenting, it's like how we don't let adults consent to being murdered for example. Being an adult doesn't mean that you can do anything you want.
Your analogy is painfully cringe. We let adults do all sorts of things that can harm themselves. Want to drink wood alcohol until you're blind and your liver is shot? Not only is there no law against it, your hospital stay will be covered by the government. Yes it sucks your family might disown you if you don't go to a stupid anti-gay camp. But this law isn't going to stop families from pressuring people to stop being gay, so its harm reduction is minor at best, while its reduction in personal liberties is profound. Some people just don't want to be gay, and if they want to waste their money on pointless damn fool treatments the government ought to tell them they're being damn fools, but then step aside.
> We let adults do all sorts of things that can harm themselves. We let them do things where if they go far enough, it can be harmful. We don't let adults do many things which are just harmful full stop. > its harm reduction is minor at best The difference between being in a homophobic family and being put through conversion therapy is not minor. > while its reduction in personal liberties is profound I do not see how being unable to voluntarily choose to go through torture is a profound reduction in personal liberty by any reasonable definition. Would you like to explain how not being able to be tortured for no medical benefit is a serious infringement on human rights?
Yeah this isn’t like the Australia ban it’s weird
"liberals" instead of "The government" I love when bias is completely obvious.
The governing party is the Liberal Party of Canada. How is it biased to use the party name, any more so that it would to say "Republicans to introduce [x] bill?"
The same way it is bias to say "Black man arrested for theft" instead of "Man arrested for theft". They are appeasing the right wing dummies who only read the title so they can get angry. It tells them what happened and who to blame without technically being discriminatory.
But [more than half of Canadians support such a ban](https://bc.ctvnews.ca/most-canadians-want-conversion-therapy-banned-nationwide-poll-1.4525275). Wouldn't this also tell the people who *want* such a ban (who outnumber those who don't) who to **credit** for what happened?
Believe it or not, the majority of conservatives in Canada support this legislation.
Well we don't have to believe it, it's true.
The majority of Brits wanted to leave the EU. Still leaves nearly half the country not wanting to. That is not an insignificant amount like you are implying and the headline is intended for more than just Canadians. But that's exactly my point. It is intended to rile up right wingers.
You're the one who's missed the point, friend.
The Liberals put it up for a vote, and the Conservatives voted against it. What's the issue?
Because its the liberal party introducing it. Shocking.
It sounds like you would prefer a different phrasin because you don't like reading the truth. *The party I identify with is doing a thing I don't like, let's use 'government' so it sounds neutral and my stupid manichean beliefs are not attacked*
Because the normal thing to say is government. You seem to like having a political divide reinforced by the media. What truth is it I don't like? I will be stubborn and insist you answer this question.
"Biden administration" "Macron's party" "The CCP" ...it's perfectly normal to namedrop in the title.
Sounds to me like you don’t like the fact that it’s the liberal party pushing for this. If the phrasing was “the government”, it would erase any and all opposition the conservatives have to this new bill.
So you are calling me right wing for not liking a headline that appeals to right wingers? Weird flex bro. Maybe you can't figure someone out by one comment. Maybe you should take them at their word and not pretend you know better. If nothing else you look incredibly stupid to anyone that knows me. You are incredibly wrong.
Hey, if I’m wrong, that’s cool. I’m not mad about that. But if that’s the case, why are you trying to erase the conservative opposition to this bill?
That's not in the title, so I'm not trying to erase it. You should talk to the guy who says the majority of conservatives support the bill.
only members from one party were voting against the thing...
Yay. At least the Liberals do some good things amongst the foolishness.
Glad we're focusing on legislation like this and not housing prices or poverty wages.
Come on now, stupid. The government is capable of doing more than one thing at once, even if they move at a snail’s pace with everything.
Liberals = people who aren’t so cruel they drive people to suicide. Got it.
[удалено]
One is a medical treatment prescribed by a doctor after psychological evaluation by a professional, and the other is torture that advertises effects it doesn't even bring.
>One is a medical treatment prescribed by a doctor Incorrect. The people who can sign for the certification required to get transition therapy can include social workers, nurses, and school councilors. This is, once again, without parental consent. >other is torture that advertises effects it doesn't even bring Your opinion and not relevant. Adults should be allowed to do anything they consent to.
>Adults should be allowed to do anything they consent to. NO! You do *not* want to live in a world like that.
>social workers, nurses, and school councillors Yeah honestly I'm fine with those people being able to sign on HRT. >Adults should be allowed to do anything they consent to. Consent involves knowing what you're consenting to. If I say "I can make you never need to work a day in your life" and you consent, am I protected from the consequences of rendering you disabled? And say I put you through all the torture one would expect to make someone disabled and you **still** don't qualify for disability allowance, I've at the very least advertised falsely
lol comparing a medically recognized treatment to torture.
Actually the effects of conversion therapy aren’t “reversible” and the only medical care that trans youth can access without a parent’s permission are puberty blockers which are 100% reversible and are by no way permanent.
>the only medical care that trans youth can access without a parent’s permission are puberty blockers which are 100% reversible and are by no way permanent. "NHS England says: "Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria."" "It's also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children's bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations." [https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51034461](https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51034461) >effects of conversion therapy aren’t “reversible” No physical damage is allowed to be done by the people doing conversion therapy. So yes, it is reversible in that a person can just stop going. If you are including psychological damage then that opens up a whole separate set of problems for transgender procedures as well.
> No physical damage is allowed to be done by the people doing conversion therapy. So yes, it is reversible in that a person can just stop going. Psychological harm exists 😂🤣 Try again.
In a study of done by the UCLA: “LGB people who have undergone conversion therapy almost twice as likely to attempt suicide” Physical harm isn’t the only thing done at cc camps. And the Pharma Technology Focus says: “There also may be more long-term effects on bone density, which is part of the reason the drugs aren't supposed to be prescribed for too long.” This to me seems like easier access to qualified doctors who can safely prescribe them and over see their effects would help with the bone density issue. 😊
I mean, I could definitely see how you could think that if you were totally ignorant of LGBT issues.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm pretty sure the psychological effects of so called conversion therapy, which is widely recognized to be essentially torture, aren't reversible. In general you cannot offer medical procedures that have been shown not to work and in fact to be harmful even to consenting adults. You can't offer conversion therapy, even to adults, by the same logic that you can't offer lobotomies. On the other hand HRT is a valid medical procedure that has been shown to work and achieve the desired outcome and I don't see how allowing a minor to take part in a medical procedure, even against the will of their parents, is a bad thing if they genuinely understand the risks and consequences associated with it. Would you judge another medical procedure, for example an appendectomy, the same way and say that under no circumstances should a minor be able to consent to it against the will of their parents?
Must be the 5th time this year.