Michigan's homophobia increases

Post Reply New Topic

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/06/1 ... ?mobile=nc

I really hate these damn republicans...such self-serving people with no sense of compassion.

What is wrong with these people. Wait, I know the answer; it starts with R and ends with N, and though an interesting coincidence, being "RepublicaN" is not the cause

RapscallioN RepresentatioN?

Who'd want to be counseled by a Christian anyway? If I wanted a fairy tale counseling I'd read the Brothers Grimm cover to cover. I'd learn more about life from Rumpelstiltskin and Rapunzel anyway.

Ha, nice burn!

It doesn't sound like the counseling was from a Christian perspective. It was about a student who was a Christian grappling with whether counseling a gay student would conflict with his/her beliefs.

The law is in line with standard consumer practices anyway- if you don't like one therapist, you go to the next one down the street. If that one doesn't work for you, then try another one. If you are gay and not feeling fulfilled by that lifestyle, then you can try Christian counseling or a counselor that is Christian. The law really only works to protect Christian counselors from political and religious persecution from militant gay activist groups, and there's no shortage of other therapists out there that will tell someone whatever they want to hear.

Provided that the referral aspect is properly enforced, I am reluctant to get too vocal about this.

Professionals do get to pick and choose the type of work that we want to do and the type of work that we don't. I am forbidden from leaving a patient high and dry, and I am ethically obliged to see to it that the patient is referred to a timely fashion to a physician who is willing and able to treat the patient--and that the patient's condition does not deteriorate in the meanwhile.

And I would far rather see a close minded counsellor refer a potential patient to an open minded counsellor than be forced into a situation that could harm everyone concerned.

I think you miss the point.

This is about the counsellor's first amendment rights, it is an attempt to tell people if you are in a certain religion you can't be in certain professions because of your religious beliefs.

Counselors are free to refer patients to other professionals instead of morally condemning them because of their religious beliefs. This should not be an issue, since a counselor is there to help people; to refuse someone because of some trite detail in that person's life is extremely unethical as a professional, and as a human being.

Having attended support groups regularly that had gay members, those "trite" differences can really add up and sometimes it's best not to try and force fit compatibility.

If a counselor genuinely has a heartfelt belief that gays and gay relationships never have as much potential to be as healthy and stable as straight people and their relationships can be, chances are that arrangement won't work out well to begin with.

If a person who happens to be gay wants counseling on a matter not involving his or her sexual orientation, but the counselor knows of their orientation, is it "forcing compatibility" for them to seek services with them?

Why does sexual orientation have to be a big deal with people? It really is trite, no matter how it is put.



Counselors are obviously not perfect, but having such black and white thinking is not conducive to effective emotional support. If the personal choices of clients are such an issue for certain counselors that they cannot do their jobs (which can amount to little more than listening, sometimes) then perhaps they should find another line of work more appropriate to their uncompromising belief system

If people desire counseling that is religiously appropriate, that is what priests and other religious authorities are there for. Professionals should know better. So to sum it up: besides being ridiculous, backwards and ignoble, it is also extremely unprofessional of a counselor to engage in such behavior. Instead of making a huge piss about it, they could have just referred the client to another practitioner; but no, everyone wants to be a civil rights hero, even if the "right" they are fighting for is of extremely questionable ethics

I am agreeing with Vigilans more so far. While it might not necessarily be the best care given it is still care overall, and in small cities with only one therapist it can make a huge difference. And the gay activist groups are hardly militant in their pursuit; they just want equal treatment.

But I don't think it's force fitting compatibility...the person that is gay is already trying to get help, so why should we stop them on a relatively meaningless thing?

Why would the type of person who clothes themselves in irritating identity politics become a counselor anyway? I would assume that such a person would be a terrible counselor.

Have you been in a coma? A lot of gay activist groups are very militant in their pursuit, why do you think there is an uproar over this law to protect a therapists' religious liberties in the first place...



Most therapists don't stop to ask people their sexual orientation, until the person brings it up, a therapist will often have no clue beforehand. A therapist is still capable of helping someone in this particular instance until they start bringing up their love life. Since the therapist wouldn't be exactly comfortable with that particular topic, it would be perfectly okay for them to recommend someone that would be.

Oh brother. -_-