10 OCTOBER 2-8, 2025 westword.com WESTWORD | MUSIC | CAFE | CULTURE | NIGHT+DAY | NEWS | LETTERS | CONTENTS | ........ ........ @ BROADWAY & YALE SEE ALL CONCERTS AT .................... MaMuse Peter Mulvey & Nathaniel Riley Heavy Diamond Ring Planina: A Harvest Gathering Eric Hutchinson Hayden Pedigo The Steel Wheels .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... Oct. 19 Arkansauce Oct.t 19 of a made-up case, because the therapist in this case hasn’t ever practiced the therapy that is banned. The therapist has no evi- dence that this therapy is actually helpful or even benign.” Outside of the Christian conservative lobby, there is little question among medical and psychiatric professionals that the practice is harmful. In an “issue brief” on conversion therapy, the AMA notes: “Practitioners of change efforts may employ techniques in- cluding: Aversive conditioning (e.g., electric shock, deprivation of food and liquids, smell- ing salts and chemically induced nausea); Biofeedback; Hypnosis; [and] Masturbation reconditioning.” The nation’s largest associa- tion of state and specialty medical societies, the AMA developed model state legislation – after Colorado’s law had passed – to ban “re- parative” or “conversion” therapy for sexual orientation or gender identity.” Dozens of organizations and individuals have fi led amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” briefs in support of each side in the case before the Supreme Court. Supporting the petitioner and the ADF are the United States itself via the U.S. Solicitor General D. Joh Sauer and a slew of Christian associations (the Colorado Springs-based James Dobson Family Institute among them), as well as longtime practitioners like Joseph Nicolosi, Jr., son of Joseph Nicolosi, who was founder and president of the National for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). Nicolosi Jr. doesn’t precisely use the ter- minology his father does -- he uses the term “reintegrative therapy,” and in his amici brief writes that he is clinical director of a psycho- logical clinic that treats traumatic memories, including those of individuals with unwanted same-sex attractions.” It further states, “Al- though sexual-attraction change is not a goal of Reintegrative Therapy®, sexual-attraction change is a known byproduct.” Nicolosi Jr.’s arguments supporting Chiles in this Supreme Court challenge are that bans on conversion therapy are “inher- ently vague” and that vagueness creates a “chilling effect” on therapists’ speech and practice. His brief also says that conver- sion therapy bans have led to threats and legal challenges for therapists, and prevent them from providing “evidence-based” treat- ments, while also hindering research on sexual attraction changes. But fans of the ban insist you can not “pray the gay away,” noting that conversion therapy is not an evidence-based treatment. “If you talk to and listen to people who’ve gone through the so-called gay conversion therapy, it’s a painful, harmful experience,” Weiser says. “This is not an abstract point, this is about people’s lives, and that’s why the legislature took action. It’s harmful, it’s cruel, and it has lasting negative effects.” There are plenty of stories stories support- ing this in the amicus briefs for the State of Colorado. Ryan Kendall was raised in Colo- rado Springs in an evangelical Christian com- munity, where he attended a Catholic high school. When Ryan’s parents discovered he was gay, they went to NARTH. Nicolosi Sr. promised Ryan that his treatment would help him suppress his same-sex desires. “When conversion therapy predictably did not work, Ryan’s parents told him he was abhorrent, disgusting, and evil,” one brief notes. “At 16, severely depressed and contemplating suicide, Ryan dropped out of high school and ran away from home.” He remained estranged from his parents for the next decade. Nine former leaders, founders and pro- moters of conversion therapy programs who have now repudiated the practice also fi led a brief in support of Colorado’s ban on con- version therapy. “They were not merely par- ticipants—they were the architects, leaders and most vocal advocates of what was once called ‘reparative therapy,’ ‘ex-gay therapy,’ or ‘sexual orientation change efforts’ (SOCE). Few people are more knowledgeable about the ineffectiveness and documented harm of conversion therapy because they witnessed it fi rsthand and now bear the moral responsibil- ity to prevent future damage,” the brief notes. “Based on their collective experience as former conversion therapy leaders, amici submit that: (1) conversion therapy is funda- mentally ineffective, with former movement leaders acknowledging that 99.9% of partici- pants do not experience orientation change; (2) these practices cause documented psy- chological harm, including increased suicide risk, particularly among LGBTQ youth; (3) the systematic renunciation by conversion therapy’s own founders and leaders provides compelling evidence of the practice’s harm- ful nature; (4) conversion therapy under- mines rather than strengthens families by creating confl ict and damaging parent-child relationships; and (5) regulations protect- ing minors from these practices align with established professional medical and mental health standards while preserving legitimate therapeutic relationships.” Even more startling are the amicus briefs from Christians who acknowledge their same-sex attraction but remain celibate in order to comply with what they believe are Biblical teachings – they attest that attempt- ing to pray the gay away or convert their same-sex attraction is futile. “Throughout the history of the Republic, states have always had the ability to prevent harm to patients and to consumers from substandard care,” says Weiser. “That’s how malpractice law works. We view this [ban on conversion therapy for minors] as part of the responsibility of the state to protect Colora- dans. There’s never been a First Amendment right to engage in harmful therapy, which is what this is.” As the Supreme Court has increasingly become a rubber stamp for the Trump administration’s policies, and the Trump- appointed Solicitor General has fi led a brief opposing Colorado’s ban, Weiser’s offi ce could face an uphill challenge. But Weiser doesn’t sound concerned. “We are believing we’re going to be able to prevail in the court, and that the court’s going to see the importance of protecting the rights of states to ensure that kids and families aren’t harmed,” he tells Westword. “If the court were to rule otherwise, we’d have to see what the nature of the ruling is and what we’d do then, but we know that we’re standing on fi rm ground, and we’re going to work hard to defend it.” Email the author at [email protected]. News continued from page 8
