One response to “ACLU crafts model ordinance on immigration for RI municipalities, urges leaving immigration enforcement to Feds”

  1. cailin rua

    Curiously, the ACLU, has issued its response re: its opposition to “anti” – conversion therapy in relation to its concerns about free speech. It seems odd to me part of their response is in relation to 2nd Amendment issues. The ACLU blog refers to a case, in Georgia, I think, where the, California, I think, law regarding conversion therapy prohibitions is brought up. They don’t seem to think most of us have the intelligence to understand what their concerns are to offer a detailed explanation.

    I would like to know two things:

    1. Since the conversion therapy law proposed in R I “Prohibits “conversion therapy” by licensed health care professionals with respect to children under eighteen (18) years of age.”
    Where does the ACLU stand in relation to the issue of “consent”?

    2. How attune is the ACLU to the issue of non-consensual treatments to those under the age of consent? Are lawyers and doctors opinions and their free speech the only subject of the ACLU’s concerns? What would J. L. Austin have to say about all this, or Bailey and Greenberg, for that matter?(I guess that’s 3 questions in question #2 but who’s counting?, or is that 4?)

    I could probably add a 3, 4, and 5, as well as 1 and 2. a, b and c(maybe d, too? and then another one, I suppose). There had been a lot of activity in Ontario province regarding the issue, not the least of which involves psychology departments of major research universities, which it has been reported, receive over 60% of their funding from pharmaceutical companies and which have been sued over the issue of “free speech” regarding candid commentary on research of pharmaceuticals produced by said pharmaceutical corporations. There have been departments there that do conversion therapy which they say is not conversion therapy. The devil has been deep into those details for a while. There has been a lot of pressure in the academic community, even in the Brown Emeritus “community”, to maintain the torture programs. But free speech, whose? Freedom to be, not as important?

    VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.