France has passed a new law criminalising the use of so-called "conversion therapy" to attempt to change the sexual orientation or gender identity of LGBTQ people.
The measure was passed unanimously by the National Assembly, 142 votes to 0.
Anyone convicted under the new law could face fines of up to €30,000 (£25,000) and two years in jail.
President Emmanuel Macron praised the move, tweeting that "being oneself is not a crime".
8
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
2 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Three cheers for queer rights and PC! Now, if only we could get laws that didn't criminalize being poor and that punished greed, then we might be making real progress, instead of feel-good ID politics instead of positive class warfare... Instead, esp. here in the US, we get nothing but stuff like this from the Dem Party, because it costs their ruling class and corporate donors nothing, so they let their bought pols pass these culture war laws.... merely a distraction from the real issues and policies that both major parties unite on..
TomMcGiverin
Level 8
Jan 26, 2022
1
As much as I hate people that demonize homosexuality or would force conversion therapy, it seems an odd thing to make illegal. If we created an actual method of conversion that could work on sexuality, or any other trait for that matter, that people would like to change, how is that somehow terrible, but other methods of changing our bodies and brains aren't??
ChestRockfield
Level 8
Jan 26, 2022
1
I've always thought anybody that wanted to change their sexual orientation only did it because of mistreatment within society.
@Lorajay Maybe, maybe not. Statistically, if you could change your orientation to bi, you'd have a twice as easy a time getting laid and finding a mate. So if you could change it, it would make sense to do so.
@Lorajay Consider ancient Greek society. Having sexual partners of the same sex and of the opposite sex was regarded as normal. Alexander the Great had three wives and had many concubines. He also had a sexual relationship with his close friend and confidant, Hephaestion.
Maybe that why he died, aged only 33 years!
@Petter Yeah, but you can't choose what you're attracted to.
@JeffMurray ... Even sheep?
@Petter Correct, if you were attracted to sheep it wouldn't be because you chose to be attracted to sheep. If you could choose what you liked, I'd choose to love the taste of rice cakes and water above all else, I'd choose to be attracted to what most people regard as the least attractive traits (or choose to dislike sex and companionship altogether). I'd choose to like cheap cars and small TVs. I'd desire a vacation to Akron over Aruba. I'd prefer the high of sniffing Crayolas to the high of sniffing cocaine. I hope that's enough examples to prove you can't choose your likes...
@JeffMurray But would you make sheep shagging legal?
@Petter The lack of choice doesn't really have anything to do with the legality of the behavior. Being attracted to children isn't a choice, but that doesn't mean anyone should legalize kid-fucking.
On a separate line of thinking, however, it's hard to justify the legality of skinning animals alive and the illegality of fucking a sheep. That's not to say they should both be legal, just pointing out how those things coexisting doesn't make much sense.
@JeffMurray But would you legalise it? This is the problem. "Unnatural sex' I presume is sex without the objective of procreation.
So where is the border?
@Petter I don't understand how this relates to what I said. I didn't use the phrase 'unnatural sex' either, so I don't know that I'm qualified to define the limits of it for you. The verbiage "legalize it" almost seems to encourage it. Decriminalize may be the more appropriate term? I don't know, but I'm not necessarily endorsing that either. My point about that was not to determine what was right and wrong, but simply that our current set of laws are incongruent.
@JeffMurray They certainly are.
@Petter Wait, now I'm curious. Are you saying sheep-fucking should be legalized?
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.