105

US Supreme Court snubs challenge to gay 'conversion therapy' ban in Washington state (www.reuters.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by negativenull@startrek.website to c/politics@lemmy.world

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Supreme Court upheld Washington state's law banning "conversion therapy" for minors, despite dissent from three conservative justices.
An appellate panel struck down local bans on conversion therapy in Florida, deeming them an unconstitutional restriction on counselors' speech.
Justice Clarence Thomas argued that the court should have taken up the case and considered the First Amendment challenge to the law.

top 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Tedesche@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

Counselors' first amendment rights aren't being affected; they can say anything they want. They're just not allowed to treat minors with treatment methods that have been proven to be ineffective at best and harmful at worst. Your first amendment rights don't apply to treatment periods; there are plenty of restrictions on your speech in a professional setting like that, and you should lose your license if you violate those rules. Those aren't state laws though, just silly old APA standards.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago

No, you're wrong. Also, if you're allergic to peanuts, you need to stop being allergic to peanuts. It's my first amendment right to try force-feeding peanuts to people who are allergic to peanuts and call it medicine.

[-] Hairyblue@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

You shouldn't have chosen to be allergic to peanuts. That is on you.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

There is nothing to "treat". Homosexuality is not a disease.

Conservatism is a disease, though. Maybe we can treat that instead.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago

Of fucking course Thomas thinks that restrictions on giving out medically unsound advice about ineffective treatments is a "First Amendment issue."

[-] Neato@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

Send him to a Conversion Camp for a month if that's what he thinks. Fuck him.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Want a free vacation Thomas? Here ya go mfer.

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 40 points 1 year ago

Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh

Why am I not surprised?

[-] DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

The very worst people we know almost always saying and doing the worst things

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

It's always the ones you most suspect.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I'm actually surprised Barrett didn't get in on that.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

This is a nice signal that Gorsuch and Barrett do have some level of sincerity in their beliefs about powers reserved to states.

This isn't to say that they're good, but they operate on a very different level than Alito and Thomas, whose primary ideology seems to be whatever owns the libs the most.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I wonder just how angry Trollito was.

this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023

105 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19241 readers

1683 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News