Pushing back against California’s homosexual counseling law

By Brad Dacus(founder of Pacific Justice Institute)

California, the land of the “tolerant,” recently has become the land of censorship and oppression, thanks to its passage of SB 1172. Set to go into effect Jan. 1, this new law bans anyone under the age of 18 from receiving licensed counseling that in any way steers them away from same-sex attraction, including away from sexual acts.

Under SB 1172, if a 14-year-old is fearful or depressed because of some feelings of same-sex attraction, he could not request any counseling that would help him understand and minimize those feelings. Soon, only counseling affirming same-sex attraction and behaviors will be allowed in California. Parental wishes regarding the kind of counseling their child needs are irrelevant under this statute. In fact, all licensed counselors or psychiatrists are explicitly censored from providing reparative counseling.

How did this draconian censorship of the mental health professions become law? Activists for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) rights pushed for this one-size-fits-all approach to counseling premised on the idea that all same-sex attraction is 100 percent genetic. Therefore, any kind of reparative counseling to the contrary is presumed a waste of time. In fact, they contend that - based on their logic - such guaranteed failure of counseling will only frustrate and depress unsuspecting young patients.

Never mind that there are countless testimonials from people, including youths, who have overcome same-sex attractions and live happy heterosexual lives. Never mind that even an American Psychological Association report on homosexuality (2009) acknowledges that sexual orientation is not determined solely by biology or genetics but also by psychological and cultural factors.

Apparently, to the detriment of countless struggling youths, acknowledgment of such realities would simply be too inconvenient for a movement committed to stamping out anything standing in the way of mandatory social acceptance of the homosexual “lifestyle” and its corresponding sexual conduct.

Fortunately for the many directly threatened by SB 1172, federal district Judge William B. Shubb in California recently issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting this new law from going into effect. In a thorough 38-page opinion, the justice found that what the Legislature relied upon to support this bill was based on “questionable and scientifically incomplete studies.”