> The conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, along with Colorado therapist Kaley Chiles, is challenging the ban on conversion therapy, contending that it violates a therapist's right of free speech in talk therapy.
> "I want to be able to operate genuinely and create therapeutic relationships that are not hindered by the values and position of our state," Chiles says, adding that for now she has to turn away clients who want conversion therapy.
This paints a picture of conversion therapy as a nice chat in an office, instead of camps where children get sent away to, with minimal supervision, and barriers to even the parents getting a hold of them again.
> Alito replied, “I agree with you,” when Windsor said people who are conservative Christians need “to return our country to a place of godliness.” He said Windsor was “probably right” when she said, “I don’t know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that needs to happen for the polarization to end. I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”
> “One side or the other is going to win,” agreed the justice. “I mean, there can be a way of working—a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. It’s not like you can split the difference.”
Supreme Court clickbait: take a quote from the two most right-wing Justices and imply it's the view of the entire Court, despite there being seven other Justices not named Thomas or Alito.
What's worrying is that the court is being influenced by these views and could vote along those lines. Or do you think what they're doing and saying is fine?
Unless they can whistle up three more votes on anything, they can shout into the void all they want and it means nothing. This is why there are nine Justices.
One of them disagreeing with the general principle of separation of church and state is newsworthy. Unless you're in agreement with them, or unless you're someone who just gets dragged around by the Overton window no matter where it goes.
Do you intend to wait until it's 5 of 9 justices being openly Christian Nationalist to raise the alarm? AFAIC even one supreme court justice blatantly contradicting the constitution in order to establish his demographic as a privileged class is cause for concern.
Changing norms in a state that make it socially unacceptable to let your kids be gay, resulting in you not be able to be an out and proud ally parent or gay kid, later adult.
Indirect social norms affect conservatives as well. I don't think it's clear which court result will result in more or less net freedom from second order effects, but it's clear what the first order effect would be (more freedom). Since first order effects are typically dominant and more reliable, a conservative result here would likely be pro freedom.
it's pro-freedom until it's your gay nephew that tries to kill himself because his family bullied him into seeing an unlicensed "therapist". Queer kids who go to these centers are twice as likely as other queer kids to attempt suicide (https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/lgb-suicide-ct-...). This isn't just another prong of the whole conservative "actually it's a violation of my rights any time someone tells me I can't violate your rights" thing, it's gonna result in dead kids.
Being gay when my parents don't like it, for one. They dress it up in bullshit about it being voluntary but it's for minors and minors never volunteer for this, they're just being coerced by their family rather than by the therapist.
> The conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, along with Colorado therapist Kaley Chiles, is challenging the ban on conversion therapy, contending that it violates a therapist's right of free speech in talk therapy.
> "I want to be able to operate genuinely and create therapeutic relationships that are not hindered by the values and position of our state," Chiles says, adding that for now she has to turn away clients who want conversion therapy.
This paints a picture of conversion therapy as a nice chat in an office, instead of camps where children get sent away to, with minimal supervision, and barriers to even the parents getting a hold of them again.
“ Alliance Defending Freedom” wants to retain the freedom to put kids in concentration camps and force them to hide themselves.
Which one does the law apply to?
https://www.commondreams.org/news/alito-2668492585
> Alito replied, “I agree with you,” when Windsor said people who are conservative Christians need “to return our country to a place of godliness.” He said Windsor was “probably right” when she said, “I don’t know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that needs to happen for the polarization to end. I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”
> “One side or the other is going to win,” agreed the justice. “I mean, there can be a way of working—a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. It’s not like you can split the difference.”
Supreme Court clickbait: take a quote from the two most right-wing Justices and imply it's the view of the entire Court, despite there being seven other Justices not named Thomas or Alito.
Glad you agree their views are extreme.
What's worrying is that the court is being influenced by these views and could vote along those lines. Or do you think what they're doing and saying is fine?
Unless they can whistle up three more votes on anything, they can shout into the void all they want and it means nothing. This is why there are nine Justices.
I sincerely hope your optimism counteracts my pessimism. It seems SCotUS is ruling more often with Alito and Thomas than against.
The majority have wiped their ass with the constitution to aid a fascist coup they were appointed to facilitate. Not holding my breath.
Where does it imply that it's the view of all nine justices on the bench?
Are you intentionally trying to undermine the gravity of this by straw-manning?
One of them disagreeing with the general principle of separation of church and state is newsworthy. Unless you're in agreement with them, or unless you're someone who just gets dragged around by the Overton window no matter where it goes.
Hot take: judges are supposed to be impartial. No judge in the highest court should hold such views. Saying them out loud is shocking.
Do you intend to wait until it's 5 of 9 justices being openly Christian Nationalist to raise the alarm? AFAIC even one supreme court justice blatantly contradicting the constitution in order to establish his demographic as a privileged class is cause for concern.
here comes another republican victory for freedom that will result in fewer things I can do and more ways people can hurt me.
How would this decision potentially result in fewer things you can do?
Changing norms in a state that make it socially unacceptable to let your kids be gay, resulting in you not be able to be an out and proud ally parent or gay kid, later adult.
Indirect social norms affect conservatives as well. I don't think it's clear which court result will result in more or less net freedom from second order effects, but it's clear what the first order effect would be (more freedom). Since first order effects are typically dominant and more reliable, a conservative result here would likely be pro freedom.
it's pro-freedom until it's your gay nephew that tries to kill himself because his family bullied him into seeing an unlicensed "therapist". Queer kids who go to these centers are twice as likely as other queer kids to attempt suicide (https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/lgb-suicide-ct-...). This isn't just another prong of the whole conservative "actually it's a violation of my rights any time someone tells me I can't violate your rights" thing, it's gonna result in dead kids.
Being gay when my parents don't like it, for one. They dress it up in bullshit about it being voluntary but it's for minors and minors never volunteer for this, they're just being coerced by their family rather than by the therapist.
[dead]