Anonymous #1 1w

If you don’t think Christian “morality” and kowtowing to religious “freedom” isn’t what got us here I don’t even know what to tell you

5

Anonymous OP 1w

Morality didn’t have anything to do with it. Religious freedom is enshrined as a first amendment right. I recommend reading this overview of the 8-1 decision: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/supreme-court-sides-with-therapist-in-challenge-to-colorados-ban-on-conversion-therapy/ This only brought up talk therapy. They think using physical treatments or medications would be a different story, but not talk therapy alone

0

Anonymous #1 1w

Talk “therapy” for attempting to convert sexual orientation is a form of psychological abuse and torture. I would know because I was forced through it. It leaves permanent mental scars. Religious freedom ends where it infringes on the rights of others.

3

Anonymous OP 1w

I’m very sorry that happened. While the plaintiff is Christian, I’m not sure how much of a role that played here. The majority really just looked at it from a free speech perspective. I still need to read up more on why they distinguish between speech and conduct, and I do recognize the harm this could cause (not just conversion therapy, but what does this mean for professional licensing organizations?). I was just trying to explain the basis for the ruling

1

Anonymous #1 1w

Let’s not try to pretend like the plaintiffs religious beliefs didn’t play a major role in why they want this form of abuse legalized, and why it succeeded.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

That wouldn’t surprise me at all. The group that took up her case is “Alliance Defending Freedom”, a conservative Christian advocacy group

5

Anonymous #1 1w

Well then it seems like we agree, just was confused at why you said “not sure how much of a role that played here”

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I assumed you meant that the justices ruled on religious grounds, sorry

6