Bans on Conversion Therapy: A Persistent Threat to Biblical Christianity - Part 1 (2023)

The fight to ban "conversion therapy" continues outside the United States, which effectively prohibits speaking out against homosexuality or transgenderism, and where there are no First Amendment protections for free speech. losing onestrong evidence baseShowing a link between condemnation of homosexuality or transgenderism and actual physical violence, the LGBT campaign continues to point to coercive practices to change sexual orientation that were employed long ago when homosexuality was a crime and personal accounts of hurt feelings. With a sympathetic press and a political-cultural establishment and defensive opposition, he made it illegal to discourage anyone, especially minors, from homosexuality or transgenderism, regardless of whether the appeal is religious or not.many countries. Laws vary, but inHaveA father who disagrees with his son about the child's true sex wears a5 yearsprison sentence Warning against homosexuality is also illegal in France and (for minors) in Germany.

Government reluctance and pressure from activists

It will soon be in the UK and Ireland, although the exact scope of the law is hotly debated. Frequent changes of government in Britain in recent years and sharply divergent views within the Conservative Party (which has generally been pro-LGBT this century) appear to have slowed the process down. Prime Ministerboris jhonsonmiliz braguerohe hesitated to proceed. in fact johnsonbelieved(right) was not necessary. Since the ban would include a ban on discouraging people from transgenderism and parents could engage in criminal efforts to prevent their child from undergoing a "gender reassignment process" (using puberty blockers and eventually surgery),Feminist Führer, as religious conservatives object. Of course, transgenderism, wherever it is applied, erases women as a real category. This substantial opposition may or may not successfully mitigate some of the more extreme elements of the proposal, which will almost certainly be implemented in some form.

The term "conversion therapy" as it wasobservedof the Christian Institute, which campaigns for religious freedom for Christians in Britain, was selected by LGBT activists and like this author pointed out, it seems carefully aligned with religious teachings and practices. Like Simon Calvert of CIspitzsaid Jayne Ozanne, president of the Ban Conversion Therapy campaign, that admonitions to the Christian doctrine of sexual abstinence outside of marriage should be prohibited. This is tantamount to the banishment of Biblical Christianity. reminder for "flee from fornication(sexual immorality) was a fundamental part of New Testament Christianity. It has remained fundamental ever since and cannot be changed as long as Christians remain faithful to God's revelation.

In fact, CI points out that the concept of conversion therapy and the proposal to ban it is actually an attempt to do so.impose liberal theologyin all churches and all Christians. A likely end goal is to include universalistic soteriology in the necessary teachings. HF toowrote an articlein the scottish journalthe Herald, by a man who was warned by his family that he would go to hell for homosexual practices. He believes that urging repentance should be a crime. Similarly, the humanist organizations in Britain want suchreligious practicessuch as "confession, fasting, professions of faith, and 'attending religious classes'" are prohibited if they are directed at conversion from homosexuality or transgenderism. This is clearly not something that Christians can achieve. But after restricting religious freedom in this way, the government can also ban any other religious practice that could be emotionally painful. In fact, many evangelicals can testify to the pain of finding the assurance of salvation. Once the government limits what can be said, it will be possible to require people to change their beliefs and practices in ways desired by the social engineers who influence or control the state.

In the current situation in the UK, Boris Johnson's conversion therapy bill was briefly withdrawn (only to bereinstalled a day laterafter fierce opposition), while Truss withdrew the proposed ban during his brief tenure. that was announcedreintroducedby the government earlier this year. However, the text of the bill has not been made public and it is unclear what it will cover. The crucial question is whether it is solely professional counseling (which, of course, is strictly voluntary and where the patient sets goals in all non-LGBT areas that should be legal), or whether it includes religious practices against homosexuality and transgenderism and / or private conversation. .

This last possibility appears to be the only reason for legislation and, as CI has pointed out, for such legislation.criminalizepastors, counselors and parents. More than a thousand clergy and ministry officials signed thethe greatest loveStatement beautifully stating Christian doctrine on sex, marriage, and family and vowed to continue teaching Christian doctrine even if it becomes illegal. More than two thousand people from the general public also signed the letter.

biggest declaration of love

oExplanation of the underlying teachingabout the organization's statement Declaration of Greater Love explains the general ideas behind the statement. The introduction begins with a doctrinal statement of commitment to fundamental Christian doctrine: the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Messiahship of Jesus, and the atonement for sin, and Christian anthropology (man made in the image of God, the depravity of nature). by sin, the sinfulness of human desires and passions contrary to the good and loving commandments of God and the call to repentance). The statement emphasizes that the gospel is a call to selfless love as Christ loved us: “Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends” (JN. 15:13). This is followed by a confession of the essential difference between men and women, a difference designed by God, marriage as God's plan, the lifelong union of man and woman as husband and wife, and the destructive effect of interpersonal activity. sex outside of that union. both for those who deal with it and "the far-reaching implications that go far beyond those who deal directly with it." He points to the many benefits of marriage, particularly "the mutual care, commitment, and personal sacrifice that subordinates selfish desire to the diverse needs and interests of others." He also highlights the fact that traditional same-sex marriage "values ​​children" and provides them with a father and mother who, of course, love them more than anyone else.

This natural family unites the generations and transmits the wisdom of past generations to the future. While single or adoptive parents can offer love and affection, "the absence of one or both birth parents is still a painful loss." The collapse of marriage and morality leads to a "fragmented and unstable" society. Sexual "identities" based on inclinations and desires contrary to the male or female body are destructive to society, the statement said. Like many non-sexual inclinations and desires, they cannot be realized without undermining and destroying the family and with it the common good. Instead, they focus morality on the self and its fulfillment. This is the opposite of the "greater love" that Jesus commanded. The explanatory introduction concludes by stating that “conversion to Christ occurs when one becomes a Christian. It involves repentance, turning away from beliefs and practices hostile to God, and instead accepting God's commandments as found in Scripture. God and others."

Therefore, conversion, including atonement for sexual sin, is essential to Christianity. It is precisely this Christian conversion that the ban on conversion therapy wants to prevent.

othe greatest lovethe declaration itself is a wonderful declaration of love and Christian morality, affirming that it is the love of God and others that sacrifices itself; It is not oriented towards self-actualization. Commit to obedient love at any cost, legal, financial, or social. The Declaration reaffirms the duty of all Christians to teach the Christian doctrine of chastity (fidelity to the opposite sex, monogamous marriage and celibacy in the single life) to all, especially children and young people, for the love of God.

In particular, the declaration includes the commitment that "there are no circumstances - neither the threat of legal sanctions, nor the economic sanction, nor the social stigma - that make us abandon the call of our Lord to love in this way, in sexual matters as in all others. And therefore there are no circumstances that make us abandon the Christian doctrine of marriage or not teach it to all people of all ages. Although the cost of being faithful to our Lord and loving our fellow men is high , we still commit ourselves to these things, because in this we also recognize that we are called to use our lives for the good of others, because there is no greater love than this, as our Lord Jesus Christ said.”

Consistent evidence for the claimIt was foundNO "Family structure is still important" document. Covers the consequences of breaking traditional morality (August 2020). Points out the advantages of marriage over cohabitation (in particular, that the children of married couples are more likely to be wealthy) and the unequal distribution of marriage throughout the spectrum of income (often at the higher levels, less often at the lower levels.) It also points to the UK government's tendency to blur the distinction between marriage and cohabitation for fear of appearing 'one-sided'. Opinion leaders in society who tend to discount cohabitation to justify society, "are actually reaping the benefits themselves, with very high marriage rates in the upper socioeconomic strata."

ongoing conflict

As mentioned, it's unclear what kind of conversion therapy bill will be offered and ultimately passed, but the Christian Institute has welcomed UK Equality Secretary Kemi Badenoch.Eidnot include prayer and joint work of churches in the ban on "conversion therapy" at the end of January. He said in a letter to lawmakers that "the freedom to express the teachings of any religion, as well as daily religious practice, are not affected by the ban."

However, LGBT activists essentially want as CIobserved“a ban criminalizing repentance, preaching, 'soft and informal prayer,' counseling, and parenting that does not support liberal theology.” The promise that religious "doctrines" will not be compromised is significant; what might be the “collective work of the churches” is open to interpretation. It could be interpreted as excluding condemnation of homosexuality and transgenderism and exhortation to repentance (although it is not clear how 'doctrine' could not be compromised in this case). Last spring, Conservative MP Mike Freer wrote to LGBT activists to say that the government does not view efforts to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity as "the collective work of churches" and such effortsit would be illegalregardless of where they take place and even if they involve religious activities (such as preaching, teaching, prayer, or exorcism).

One real problem is that the term "conversion therapy" is not defined and seems to refer to anything activists dislike. Calvert noted: "Activists previously said they wanted to ban brutal abuse like electroshock therapy. But that's already illegal. Now they admit they actually want to ban traditional theology and gender-critical feminism... They don't like the idea that churches pray.prayersdisagree,” nor do “activist women and parents discourage young people from accelerating gender transitions… Jayne Ozanne, president of the Banishment Conversion Therapy campaign, specifically says that a ban should include “soft prayers and not forced”. Apparently sentences that don't fit their specific LGBTQ+ narrative should be banned. The pastoral care of the Church is also in the firing line. Ozanne is particularly opposed to churches teaching that sex outside of marriage is wrong (something they have been doing for 2,000 years) and branding abstinence as "harmful" and "psychologically harmful." So they set up protective language to try to force Parliament to ban the views of their theological and philosophical opponents. That's not what criminal law is for." A few days earlier, referring to LGBT activists, she had stated that "the misappropriation of protective language to attack traditional teaching is the calling card of this movement."

Of course, no law lasts, and no freedom can last if they can be nullified by personal pain. However, this is essentially the argument of LGBT activists. Neither freedom nor equality will show that certain behaviors and/or personal inclinations should be immune to criticism. This can only be recognized through sensitivity. In fact, people with homosexual leanings and people who identify as transgender (to the extent that there was historical awareness of transgenderism) are subject to stigma. But to know what is wrong, we have to know that homosexuality and/or transsexualism are right. What prevails today is the obvious fact that many people who identify as LGBT are good people. But the same goes for white collar criminals. Attempts to suppress religious teachings and practices on sexual or other matters are obviously wrong. They include the requirement of disobedience to religious commandments, and religious commitments must come before all others because they are based on a statement of divine revelation and a personal perception of the truth of those statements.

We all face the prospect of dying and being responsible for our lives. For this reason, claims of religion must take precedence over claims of personal pain, however hurt one may be.

However, this "broad ban" is exactly what the activists want, because what they really want is to change the religious beliefs they don't like. This is what the devolved governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are actually proposing and which, along with the first known charge against someone under a Conversion Therapy Act, will be the subject of a later article.