The “conversion therapy” rule should be written so that no one can use it to do things that would be harmful, such as using it to justify firing someone for following their religious persuasions in therapy.
Robert Gehrke mocks our public process for arriving at such a consensus rule. (“Don’t follow the LDS Church’s advice when it comes to dangerous ‘conversion therapy’,” Oct. 17).
His disdain for the Utah Legislature is deplorable. He uses a historical episode to paint a picture of a blundering lawmaking body and support his argument that therapy professionals should be the only group to influence the “conversion therapy” rule.
This is not only undemocratic, but episodes just as embarrassing — if not more so — as suggesting that women might bring babies into a coal mine could be dug up on the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. No doubt such criticism would lead to accusations that Gehrke opposes fundamental institutions of our democracy.
Let’s not forget that state-level democratic institutions are also an essential part of our country’s Constitution. The Utah Legislature is sovereign on matters of state level concern like this one. Furthermore, the principle of common consent means this debate has to make its way around the table of voices, as ignorant as some of those voices may be.
Benjamin Schmidt, Sandy