A Progressive Republican?

AM (an American combat aviator with an inquiring mind):  Gentlemen, I just read where New Jersey Governor Christie signed into law a ban on gay conversion therapy (the only other state to enact such a law is California).

IM:  According to Christie, a Roman Catholic, gays are born gay and that therapy to convert them from gay to heterosexual can lead to depression, suicide, and so forth.

Old Gadfly:  Is there evidence to support this claim?

IM:  No.  The claim is based on anecdote and speculation.  But there is evidence that a gay, lesbian, or bisexual orientation can lead to mental disorders and suicide.  A study in The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, involving a nation-wide sample, concluded

The findings from our study show that they [gay men, lesbians, and bisexual men and women] are more likely to have mental health problems and to attempt suicide.  Although not specifically examined in our paper, these findings may be one manifestation of minority stress.  Regardless of the etiology, sexual minorities are clearly a population vulnerable to severe and, in some cases, life-threatening mental health outcomes.[1]

Old Gadfly:  If this is true, then I can appreciate why some parents might be inclined to encourage conversion therapy for their children.  However, the conclusion in the article you just quoted says sexual minorities are “more likely” to attempt suicide.  Isn’t this finding based on “self-reporting” by those who participated in the study?

IM:  Yes.  And your question relates to a controversy regarding a study by Dr. Robert Spitzer.  Who is Dr. Spitzer?  Spitzer, a psychiatrist, led the campaign in the 1970s to remove homosexuality as a disorder from the psychiatric Diagnostics and Statistics Manual, used for diagnostic and treatment protocols.  At the time, Spitzer believed homosexuality was a genetic predisposition and thus should not be treated as a disorder.  Years later, he conducted a study to see if it was possible for those who voluntarily sought reparative (or conversion) therapy to change from a homosexual to heterosexual orientation.  He concluded that there is evidence that change can happen.

AM:  I can imagine the study offended the politically active gay community.

IM:  Absolutely.  Critics claimed “self-reporting,” which served as the basis for collecting data in the study, doesn’t prove anything.

Old Gadfly:  Then, since most psychotherapy is based on self-reporting, it could follow that any form of psychotherapy is a pseudo-science.  Didn’t Spitzer issue an apology for the study?

IM:  Yes, supposedly, a pro-gay nonprofit called Truth Wins Out, received an exclusive copy of the letter of apology, which served as the basis for a highly spun New York Times article.

Old Gadfly:  What’s your take on the apology?

IM:  According to the Times article, Gabriel Arana, a gay man who was nominated for Spitzer’s study but did not participate, visited Spitzer to confront him about the study.  At the time, Spitzer was very vulnerable himself.  He was turning 80, suffered from Parkinson’s disease, and had lost his icon status within the field of psychiatry, especially stemming from the barrage of criticism about his conversion study.  Arana emotionally converted Spitzer, resulting in a letter of apology.  Here is a link to Arana’s testimonial about “ex-gay therapy.”  I read it and concluded that Arana struggled more with “choice.”  Also, I found it strange, yet profoundly significant, that none of those individuals who actually participated in the study later confronted Spitzer to challenge the results of the study.

AM:  If Arana and his anti-conversion therapy cohort believe their orientation is genetic and not a matter of choice, then perhaps pedophilia is also a genetic predisposition and such behavior by priests in the Catholic Church should be defended by the gay community.

Old Gadfly:  The Catholic Church scandal is an example of a potentially distorted narrative.

AM:  Why do you say that Gadfly?

Old Gadfly: In the summer of 2002, according to former 25-year CBS newsman, Bernard Goldberg, a CNN producer explained to him that while there were a couple of high profile cases of pedophilia (a couple of men raping an eight-year old), the situation was overwhelmingly about “gay priests molesting fifteen- and sixteen year-old boys.  Those are the facts, and they are indisputable.  It’s just amazing how people around here are not getting it.”[2]   In other words, the media chose to spin it as pedophilia to shield the overwhelming gay component.  Goldberg went on to document how individuals who do not support the gay agenda are targeted.  For example, Dr. Laura Schlessinger was punished for her position on same sex unions and adoption.[3]     

IM:  Earlier today, Fox News reported another punishment case for views contrary to the gay agenda.  In New Mexico, a same-sex couple approached a photographer to take photographs of their civil union ceremony.  The photographer declined the request due to religious views.  While the same-sex couple immediately arranged another photographer, the choice by the first photographer was apparently too offensive.  So, the same-sex couple filed a discrimination complaint, and won a human rights ruling by the New Mexico Supreme Court, forcing the first photographer to pay $7,000 in legal fees incurred by the same-sex couple.

Old Gadfly:  The Schlessinger and photographer cases are examples of Hayek’s argument about the end of truth as a condition of totalitarianism.  But, let’s get back to actual science and evidence.  Is there any evidence on suicide rates for gay, lesbian, and bisexual men and women?

IM:  Unfortunately, yes.

AM:  Why unfortunate?  Because the evidence does not support the Canadian study that gays, lesbian, and bisexual men and women are more vulnerable to suicide?

IM:  No, because this population is in fact more vulnerable, even without conversion therapy.  There is a lot of research seeking to understand this phenomenon, and the evidence indicates youths within this population are five times more likely than heterosexuals (21.5% versus 4.2%) to attempt suicide.  Yet, despite evidence contrary to his notions, Christie still banned conversion therapy.

AM:  Christie is not a stupid man.  Why would he do this?    

IM:  I read a Huffington Post article on this topic, where Christie was quoted to say, “I also believe that on the issues of medical treatment for children we must look to experts in the field to determine the relative risks and rewards. . . . I believe that exposing children to these health risks without clear evidence of benefits that outweigh these serious risks is not appropriate."  Therefore, these notions justified government intervention to deny individuals the freedom to make their own choices.

Old Gadfly:  I agree with your assessment, IM, on the impact of Christie’s decision.  However, it may be more difficult to answer AM’s question as to why Christie made this decision.  Most likely, he made it for political capital in upcoming elections, as opposed to the actual science behind conversion therapy.  If true, then this vulnerable population is a mere pawn in a political chess game.  More broadly and strategically, however, Christie’s behavior is dangerous because it reflects a progressive orientation that sees government as more knowledgeable in how individuals should behave within a society.  Ayn Rand cautioned against this progressive rationale in her chapter on the “Nature of Government” in The Virtue of Selfishness.  Here is an important excerpt:

Now consider the extent of the moral and political inversion in today’s prevalent view of government. Instead of being a protector of man’s rights, the government is becoming their most dangerous violator; instead of guarding freedom, the government is establishing slavery; instead of protecting men from the initiators of physical force, the government is initiating physical force and coercion in any manner and issue it pleases; instead of serving as the instrument of objectivity in human relationships, the government is creating a deadly, subterranean reign of uncertainty and fear, by means of nonobjective laws whose interpretation is left to the arbitrary decisions of random bureaucrats; instead of protecting men from injury by whim, the government is arrogating to itself the power of unlimited whim—so that we are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.

            AM:  I did not appreciate Rand’s The Virtue of Selfishness when I was first exposed to it in a philosophy course at the United States Air Force Academy in the late 60s.  Now I do.  As a young girl, Rand actually witnessed Lenin’s centrally planned government take control of her father’s pharmacy business.  The Soviet collectivist government believed Rand’s father “did not build” his business—it belonged to the people.  Now, we hear the President of the United States make similar proclamations.

            IM:  Add to this an Administration that slow rolls Congress in trying to figure out what happened at Benghazi, in Fast and Furious, in the IRS conservative targeting practice, in targeting journalists, and so forth, and we clearly see a government that is free to do anything it pleases. 

AM:  This week, the Justice Department brought suit against Texas for their voter ID legislation.

            Old Gadfly:  In a way, Holder and his lieutenants are sending a message that they must provide permission for the way American citizens express their most fundamental right, even though 71% of American citizens favor voter ID. 

AM:  Rand’s prophesies about the dangers of progressivism may be the reason the progressive media elite ignored the recent movie productions of her book, Atlas Shrugged.  The theme is all about “the ultimate inversion,” where the government does anything it pleases.

Old Gadfly:  Do you think there is an attempt to use brute force to keep Obamacare alive?  There is nothing voluntary about it, unless you are part of a privileged class that has been exempted from compliance, in other words, granted permission not to comply.

AM:  Perhaps Christie’s coziness with Obama explains the progressive ban on conversion therapy.

          

---

[1] Bolton, S., and Sareen, J.  (2011).  Sexual orientation and its relation to mental disorders and suicide attempts:  Findings from a nationally representative sample.  The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 56(1), 35-45.

[2] As cited in Bernard Goldman, Arrogance:  Rescuing America from the Media Elite, (New York, NY:  Warner Books, 2003), p. 166.

[3] Ibid, p. 169.