By Matt Underwood US Supreme Court to examine Colorado’s gay ‘conversion therapy’ ban, and it’s hard not to feel a sense of dread mixed with disbelief. The very idea that a court, especially this one, would even consider overturning a ban on a practice so demonstrably harmful is, frankly, infuriating. It feels like we’re living in a time warp, hurtling backward while the rest of the world hopefully progresses.
The core issue at hand revolves around whether a state, in this case Colorado, has the right to prohibit licensed therapists from providing “conversion therapy” to minors. This isn’t about banning speech; it’s about banning actions, specifically, actions that have been proven to cause significant psychological damage. The argument that this somehow violates the First Amendment seems absurd. It’s like claiming a law prohibiting doctors from performing unnecessary surgery infringes on their right to free speech. The focus needs to be on the welfare of the children, who are being subjected to these so-called therapies, which are really just a form of abuse.
It’s easy to imagine the arguments that will be made, the twisted logic that will be employed. We can almost hear the justifications, the claims that parents have a right to choose whatever “treatment” they deem best for their children, regardless of the scientific evidence. The idea that this is a matter of religious freedom is especially galling, particularly when the “religious” motivation is often a thinly veiled form of bigotry. The fact that this is even being considered is a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ+ rights.
This whole scenario is a perfect example of a society taking steps forward only to stumble backward in a hurry. One must ask, what about the rights of gay people? It’s not like anyone is suggesting a ban on “straight conversion camps,” which is something that should immediately highlight the inherent unfairness of this debate. How can it be about genuine well-being if no one is forced to be straight?
The hypocrisy is stunning. Some individuals want to force kids to conform to their views on sexuality, the same views that condemn those children to hell. The fact that some “Christian” therapists are at the forefront of this movement is especially infuriating. They should focus on the messages of love and acceptance within their faith. It’s a complete misrepresentation of what their faith should be about.
Of course, the real worry is not just the potential outcome of this case, but the precedent it could set. If the Supreme Court sides against Colorado, it could open the door for similar challenges to bans on conversion therapy in other states. The implications are far-reaching. The same individuals may want to undo the progress that has been achieved with gender-affirming care for trans youth.
The potential for this decision to be overturned also brings up the states’ rights argument. It’s curious how quickly some people embrace the idea of state’s rights when it suits their agenda, while simultaneously ignoring human rights. Colorado’s right to decide what is best for its own citizens seems clear.
The debate seems to miss the point: conversion therapy is not therapy. It’s a dangerous, ineffective practice that can cause serious harm. It’s not about speech; it’s about actions. The focus should be on protecting vulnerable children, not enabling those who seek to harm them.