Amazon has decided to stop selling books pushing the fraudulent idea that people can change their sexual orientation. Hate group the Family Research Council and members of Congress are angry about it:
If one of the country's biggest retailers is going to ban books, it had better have a good reason. Amazon didn't. The authors it blacklisted weren't inciting violence or promoting terrorist jihad -- they were offering hope to men and women suffering from sexual bondage. But to LGBT activists, it didn't matter what the books actually said or how many people they helped. All the extremists care about is that these authors might undermine their agenda and therefore must be silenced.
Of course, to most Americans, the intolerance is nothing new. We've all watched Google, Twitter, YouTube, and others crack down on conservative speech for years. But banning books that could give people freedom? That's taking the intolerance to a whole new level. Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), who's been horrified at the fast pace of censorship in this country, refuses to let Amazon get away with it. "Everybody is entitled to information," she told me on Monday's "Washington Watch." "And what Amazon has done is [block] people from having access to information that they're seeking and that they want. And it's just not right." Censorship, she said, should have no place in a country that values free speech.
"We don't want to start having a society where, on controversial issues, people will only have access to one viewpoint.... That's what's made America different than others. [Sexual orientation change efforts may be] an emotional topic, but we need to have more information out there for people so they can make decisions. [U]nwanted sexual attraction is a very difficult thing.... This isn't just a topic that we should throw around the political sphere. We have to remember these are individuals... And if people are struggling with something so personal, and they want more information, they should have access to a book... [to] get some potential help... or see if [it's] something they want to pursue or not. To just to have one group say, 'No, our way is the only way, and we're not going to let any other American hear about another alternative way to think about a condition or a subject' -- that's what we've seen in other countries in the past, and that's a scary place to go."
Apparently FRC and its Congressional allies, particularly Rep. Vicky Hartzler (who has been known to freely funnel any lie FRC tells her), is relying on hysterical connotations about "intolerance" and "censorship" to tell boldfaced lies. When FRC says that those books aren't inciting violence, the group is clearly lying.
"Ex-gay therapy" has been condemned by over 40 medical and professional organizations including the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Nursing, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Medical Association. In addition, 18 states, including Colorado have banned making minors go through this type of "therapy." Earlier this year, a group of former leaders in the "ex-gay" movement put out a statement denouncing the fraudulent "therapy."
Many who have gone through this sort of "therapy have told stories how it ended up being a form of abuse which made their lives even worse.
According to LGBTQNation:
. . . the actual methods of ex-gay therapy are shady and questionable. They include telling people not to masturbate, rigorous exercise and bible study, “covert aversion” (making LGBTQ identity seem dangerous, unhealthy and repulsive) and “reframing desire” onto “heterosexual surrogates” (re-directing sexual desire onto opposite-sex partners). Other methods include not shaking hands with anyone of the same-sex and not listening to music. A 2013 survey showed that 84 percent of former patients of ex-gay therapy said it inflicted lasting shame and emotional harm. Numerous conversion therapy advocates have later come out as still gay and apologized for the harm it causes.
It's ironic that FRC is espousing the idea of forcing a business to provide a service The organization has been a very vocal proponent of the idea that businesses shouldn't have to provide a service if it interferes with the owner's "deeply held beliefs."
So why is FRC or members of Congress angry at Amazon? Apparently the company seems to have a "deeply held belief" against books which would put vulnerable members of the LGBTQ community on the road to depression, self-hatred, destructive behaviors, and suicide.
Sounds like a "deeply held belief" we should all embrace.
No comments:
Post a Comment