Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judges at odds over new law that bans gay conversion therapy for teens
The Sacramento Bee ^ | 12/4/12 | Denny Walsh

Posted on 12/04/2012 2:12:51 PM PST by Clint N. Suhks

In a rare development, two federal judges in Sacramento have come to opposite conclusions on the constitutionality of a new California law that bars the use of "gay conversion therapy" on minors.

On Tuesday morning, U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller ruled that the law prohibiting licensed mental health providers from steering patients under 18 away from gay and lesbian lifestyles does not infringe on the suing providers' constitutional guarantee of free speech.

Thus, she concluded, providers challenging the law are unlikely to prevail, and she refused to grant them a preliminary injunction precluding enforcement of the law, which is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1.

Late Monday, U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb found in a separate case raising the same issue that the new law does infringe on the free speech rights of providers.

(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda

1 posted on 12/04/2012 2:12:58 PM PST by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

>> that bars the use of “gay conversion therapy” on minors.

Why would anyone wish to convert their child into a homosexual? That’s completely #d up.


2 posted on 12/04/2012 2:29:21 PM PST by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

reading this with the off brand medication free speech ruling, it would seem the law is set to go down in flames.

this is like communist voting. Once the election is over stop counting the votes. Once the abuse has cause recruiting, forbid treatment for the abuse.


3 posted on 12/04/2012 2:34:04 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

I see. Preventing one person from talking to another is not an infringement of free speech. Got it.


4 posted on 12/04/2012 3:00:30 PM PST by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

But judges have no problem with “therapy” that chops off a child’s tally wacker, for his mental health.


5 posted on 12/04/2012 3:01:58 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

Next it will be illegal to convert a democrat into a sane conservative.


6 posted on 12/04/2012 4:17:01 PM PST by 2nd Amendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

It figures that a woman judge would trash the Constitution but a man judge would have to set her straight.

No more woman judges - EVER!


7 posted on 12/04/2012 6:29:13 PM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
Off-topic some, it was a Congresswoman who voted against war with Japan:

http://www.ovimagazine.com/art/8030

8 posted on 12/05/2012 2:32:00 AM PST by Does so (Dims don't think ... they PLOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson