spriggWhile it’s not quite surprising that a hate group spokesperson who once called for gays to be “exported” out of the United States made a statement like this, it serves as a reminder of exactly how awful the people who make up our opposition really are. Writing for the Family Research Council’s blog in a piece entitled “Robin Williams, Rehab, and Reorientation,” Sprigg uses Robin Williams’ tragic suicide to shill for harmful (fact), discredited (fact), ineffective (fact) “ex-gay” or “reparative” therapy:

In the wake of Williams’ suicide, many TV commentators and friends of the late star talked about the challenges of mental illness (Williams suffered from depression), addictions — and rehab. I saw comedian Andy Dick say, “I’ve been to rehab seventeen times.”

In light of this history, I have only one question for socially liberal political activists — why aren’t you trying to outlaw rehab?

I ask the question because such activists are trying to ban a form of mental health treatment — not drug and alcohol rehabilitation, but “sexual orientation change efforts” (“SOCE”), also known as “sexual reorientation therapy.” Such therapy involves assisting people with unwanted same-sex attractions to overcome them.

It’s a disgusting question, but it’s a particularly easy question to answer for any person who respects science.

Dear Peter,

Rehab actually helps people and has a track record of setting millions of peoples’ lives back on track. “Ex-gay” or “reparative” therapy is condemned by all major medical and mental health associations, because its track record shows that it destroys people’s lives, leads to increased incidences of depression and suicide, and doesn’t change anyone’s sexual orientation! As we all know, Alan Chambers, former head of the now defunct Exodus International, said that 99.9% of the people he encountered in his many years with the “ex-gay” industry experienced absolutely no change. Moreover, the internet is absolutely littered with stories of people whose lives have been derailed and destroyed by charlatan “therapists” who value religious ideology over science.

So the simple answer is that “socially liberal political activists” value science and things that help people; anti-gay activists value their bigoted, factually incorrect ideology, and are willing to leave trails of destroyed lives in service of it.

Sincerely,

Evan

Peter goes on:

Whatever the motivation, there are those who have simply made a choice to walk away from the homosexual lifestyle, without clinical help — much like how Robin Williams simply stopped using drugs and alcohol in the 1980’s. Others have sought professional help, perhaps at the urging of family members, in the form of “sexual reorientation therapy” — much like when Williams entered a formal alcohol rehab program in 2006. Whether simply through personal development, religious counseling, or with the help of a licensed or unlicensed counselor, thousands (if not millions) of people have experienced significant changes in one or more of the elements of their sexual orientation (attractions, behavior, or self-identification).

Homosexual groups, however, have successfully pressured professional organizations such as the American Psychological Association to discourage such therapy. More recently, following an example set in California, legislators in several states have introduced bills to forbid licensed mental health counselors from engaging inSOCE with minors at all. Meanwhile in New Jersey (which already passed such a ban), the Southern Poverty Law Center has sued even unlicensed SOCE providers, charging them with “consumer fraud.”

Critics of reorientation therapy make two charges — that it is ineffective, and that it is harmful. But they support these charges only by holding such therapies to a standard of “effectiveness” and “safety” that is impossible for any mental health treatment to meet.

QUOTE-UNQUOTE “EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY.”

Seriously?!

Seriously. Yes, well, Peter, there are standards in medical and mental health fields. And as much as Sprigg would like his sheltered readers to continue believing that some sort of homosexual mafia pulls the strings at all major medical and mental health organizations, it’s simply not true.

This range of outcomes is no different from any other form of mental health treatment — such as drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Yet critics of reorientation therapy claim that “it doesn’t work” because the proportion of clients who achieve complete transformation on a permanent basis is less than 100%. Can rehab live up to this standard?

Show me the medically valid treatment that shares the 0.1% success rate that Chambers referenced above and we’ll talk, hate group lackey boy.

Click over to read the whole thing if you can stomach it.

[h/t Equality Matters]