PUBLISHED_46 Reflections on Bill C-6

October 28, 2020

Many people have been asking about where I stand on Bill C-6, which relates to conversion therapy.

I hope the information below will help.

As of Oct 26, 2020, I felt that the wording of Bill C-6 (formerly C-8) and anything related to the definition of “conversion therapy” was not clear enough. As such, I participated in a video campaign for people to vote against it as it was written at that time. Note that at no time did I mention approval of “conversion therapy.”  The fact is that I disavow any therapy that has, as it’s aim, the changing of a person’s sexual attractions or gender identity. Rather, my issue was with the lack of clarity surrounding the phrase “conversion therapy,” for as the bill was written at the time, it would have been very easy for normal and healthy conversations about ideas, mindsets, one’s self-concept and sense of identity, ideologies, and behaviors, to become inhibited and or impaired out of fear of breaking the criminal code.

One idea that I saw to be under threat of illegalization, under the wording of the bill at that time, was the simple broadening of narratives about all things LGBTQ+, outside of ideas that are 100% affirmative of LGBTQ+ ideology. Part of the broadening of the narratives should include the reality that many people who used to embrace LGBTQ+ ideology, and even in some cases LGBTQ+ activism, have had a transformation in heart and today pursue fulfillment first and foremost in Jesus Christ, with a greater degree of hope, joy, freedom, and peace than they experienced ever before, while still being honest with themselves about the existence of whatever particular sexual/romantic attractions/inclinations they might experience.  It also includes the rapidly increasing amount of stories those who have chosen to detransition (some unfortunately now suffering with the permanent health/physiological effects of their earlier choices).

I explain my position in this brief video, which was released on October 5th. More below the video.

Identifying the Problem
I find peace in knowing that the Catholic Church does not endorse therapy designed to change someone’s sexual/romantic attractions/inclinations. However, again, the vagueness of the proposed law could make what might otherwise be a good and healthy conversation between family members, friends, or professionals, a conversation wherein the criminal code has been violated as a result of the presentation of ideas that are not fully affirmative of LGBTQ+ ideology.

Though the members of parliament spearheading this Bill have told Canadians that there will be allowances to ensure that that doesn’t happen, they are (so far) refusing to put that into writing within the Bill itself.

Evidence of Tolerance
In order to stand for true diversity, the narratives of those who have chosen to walk away from their prior-held LGBTQ+ mindset needs to be included – whether they involve an encounter with Jesus Christ or not. Likewise, if tolerance really does exist, then we should be seeing evidence of tolerance for those who have chosen to pursue fulfillment outside of the realm of what LGBTQ+ ideology would typically suggest, including through the pursuit of a heart of chastity.

A Foundation of Hope
It is important, however, that with chastity so often being misinterpreted to imply celibacy and or abstinence, it is now more than ever an appropriate time to help people come to understand the true meaning of that virtue so that people can see that virtue for what it is: a sledgehammer to resentment and despair, and a gateway to hope for a better tomorrow – especially for people who experience unwanted attractions/inclinations and who wish to navigate their sense of being with a more complete set of narratives to consider.

Further, people deserve to know about this virtue, and the potential hope, joy, freedom, and peace that is possible within it. If they were provided the opportunity to become aware of this virtue, and if this was not inhibited/impaired by the law, then they would be able to at least make decisions in a more informed way than otherwise, aiding them in their journey of self-determination and informed consent, in whatever way it manifests.

Lastly, because of the hope, joy, freedom, and peace that I personally know is possible via the pursuit of a heart of chastity (amidst the pursuit of all of the other virtues), I cannot see it as anything other than uncharitable to impose laws that would serve to impede/inhibit people’s understanding of that virtue, and thus impede/inhibit the hope, joy, freedom, and peace that is possible for them to experience if they chose to open their hearts in this way.