Michele Bachmann’s husband Doctor Marcus Bachmann has come under fire for using what is known as reparative therapy in his Christian psychology clinic in Minneapolis. Reparative therapy supposedly converts gay men into straight men via prayer. There is little scientific evidence that this method of ‘therapy’ creates permanent change.
According to the Huffington Post:
MINNEAPOLIS — The husband of Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann says counselors at his family’s Christian clinics are not focused on converting homosexuals to heterosexuality through prayer.
Marcus Bachmann told the Star Tribune in a report published Friday that his Minnesota clinics “don’t have an agenda or a philosophy of trying to change someone.”
Bachmann’s comments follow the release of a gay activist’s undercover video that appears to show one of the clinics’ counselors offering reparative therapy to help him become heterosexual. The video produced by gay advocacy group Truth Wins Out was first aired Monday by ABC News.
Marcus Bachman, whose business has collected government funding from Medicaid-backed programs, says counselors follow the wishes of patients and don’t force any treatment.
Dr. Bachmann has denied calling patients ‘barbarians’ despite evidence to the contrary. Additionally, the clinic, which is co-owned by Michele Bachmann, has taken $137,000 in medicaid payments. Christians may have any kind of therapy they want, I suppose. However, should insurance companies and medicaid be footing the bill? Is this not a little too much of a cross-over? Is this therapy something a church could provide or is it using techniques that are approved of by American Psychological Association?
Michele Bachmann was one of the darlings of the religious right. She needs to know that she cannot switch that label off and on to suit her political needs at the moment. A president is president of all the people, not just straight people. Yes, the clinic is a family business, and has a great deal to do with her campaign. Americans are very interested in what goes on there when our tax dollars are funneled in to a clinic where unproven procedures and practices are conducted. Dr. Bachmann sounds like a charlatan if that is the kind of therapy he is practicing.
Perhaps like we are very interested when our tax dollars are poured into a White House where the unproven procedures and practices haven’t worked and have left the country in a growing economic and fiscal mess. And speaking of charlatans and switching labels on and off. That chap on the White House is now trying to pose as the great champion of cutting back on the budget deficits and the national debt. LOL and more LOL.
Man-caused global warming is still unproven, but we have a runaway EPA spending our tax dollars trying to combat it in the midst of global recession.
Emma, I am not a scientist but…I can’t imagine that man wouldn’t have an impact on the earth, especially since the industrial revolution. Let’s put it this way, I would be extremely surprised to find out there is no man-made global warming.
I guess the big push on renewable energy has now become directed more towards harmfulness than simply running out?
Obama? Global warming? What’s that got to do with Dr. Bachmann’s clinic? We’ve all got our pet peeves about spending. And I know the Repubs look at anything the Dems support and believe the opposite has to be true. Do most people really believe “pray away the gay” or abstinence are valid programs? More valid than Planned Parenthood, birth control methods, global warming? If so, aiiiiii!!! We’ve met the enemy and he is us!
I suppose because of privacy issues, we’ll never know what percentage of gays benefitted, and in which way if at all, from Bachmann’s clinic. He apparently doesn’t have the credentials expected of a therapist but more of what you’d find from a church counselor. I’m sure that if Michelle Bachmann advances in the Repub. primary, the clinic will receive even more scrutiny. There are probably a few patients waiting to tell all as well. Throw in whether the candidate Bachmann supports Medi-caid cuts while taking funds and there’ll be plenty of reason to kick back with a cold one and some popcorn.
I didn’t even notice that remark about EPA was under the Bachmann clinic thread. (I am reading behind the scenes.) I suppose that ‘praying away the gay’ if ok if and only if this is done as a religious gesture. It seems sort of abusive to me but churches can pretty much do what they want as part of religious practice.
I find it horribly offensive as a bona fide method of therapy and certainly hope not one dime of my tax money went to support this non-therapy. In fact, I call for hyde amendment type legislation to protect gay people from having to go through this kind of self condemnation.
Then take away funding for all alternative therapies. The NIH National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) has spent millions of taxpayer dollars studying Reiki, acupuncture and “homeopathy.”
Hey, if our tax dollars aren’t being used to fatten pharma execs, then they are being entirely wasted, right?
I was thinking of medicare and medicaid actually. I know that most insurance makes it so difficult to claim chiro that you just end up paying out of pocket. So why should I pay for my chiro therapy when some doo wop is laying on hands to make someone stop being gay. Sorry, that is a stretch. What is the difference in that and praying to be rid of major diseases? Pray in your church or on your own time but don’t ask me to pay for some charlatan to ‘cure’ you.
Acupuncture has been around for thousands of years. I have seen indication that it heals. I have seen no indication that prayer makes people stop being gay and it it did, then it should be given for free.
Would Dr. Bachmann put his therapy methods under NIH’s scrutiny?
I am sure that under GWB’s Good, Xtian, “pro-life” reign (despite Iraq, the mangling of Katrina and war in Afghanistan) this was not only heralded and cheered, but funded under the office of “faith-based initiatives”
You know I can pray for world peace in one hand and shit in the other….but at least I know which one will come first and is more effective.
You know – let’s take away ALL spending from FAITH-BASED BS and fuind science. You know those evil people who believe in evolution and actual methods instead of rain dancing and speaking in tongues.
I sure as hell don’t like my VIRGINIA tax dollars going to “abstinence only” programs that are run and administered by Liberty Univ. or the Focus on everyone else’s family Assoc.
But hey – at least she has alienated the Gay vote…as if THAT would be a stretch.
LOL….maybe she can pray for the presidency….but I’ll wager most Americans would rather shit in their hands first. HA!
Bubba, I am laughing too hard now.
I totally agree, since every effort has been made to defund Planned Parenthood so it can’t hand out contraception to medicaid women.
That tax dollar thing can work both ways. Isn’t abstinence only something kids should hear from parents, not strangers?
@Emma
I know nothing about Reiki, but I know that acupuncture works for my son’s aching back. It’s a centuries old method, that has survived, I suppose, because it helps people with various pains.
It entails no drugs or invasive procedures. The more we learn about it, the better IMHO.
A great nation is swaying on the brink of a major fiscal crisis, and here we are so desperately concerned with prayer in a small storefront clinic in Minnesota. Not to mention the actual price of Slim Jims. Yeesh!!!
@Wolverine, if you think it is about prayer, then you really haven’t understood what some of us have been saying. Do you want $137k of taxpayer medicaid money going to a facility that prays over gays to make them straight?
Its always the other guy who is bankrupting the country, isn’t it?
@punchak You’re missing the point. I’m not arguing the effectiveness of any alternative therapy, and I’ve said here many times that I believe people are hard-wired to be gay. This little Bachman distraction is more about politics and ideology than it is about funding “proven” therapies.
And it’s high time that our local churches simply stopped providing schooling, food, medical care, shelter, job training, counseling, disaster relief and adoption services, so Bubba can pay for it all with her VIRGINIA taxes!
Churches are welcome to do those things. Unfortunately, Bachmann has spoken out on many of these ‘secular’ things and how she would set policy. So yea, it really is about politics. I believe the ideology comes more from Bachmann’s side than mine.
I agree with Emma on the hard-wiring.
Glad to be of help. Pray away the gay is awfully dumb.
Well, Moon, if you can show me a breakdown of how much of that $137,000 in Medicaid money went to “prayer sessions” and how much went to counseling functions of which you might approve, then we can talk. Personally, I looks to me like just another group attempt to kneecap a conservative female politician with strong religious beliefs.
Now, if you want to talk about some big financial shenanigans, go to Politico and read their long article on how Obama has rewarded his big money campaign bundlers with administration jobs and their organizations with stimulus money. It doesn’t even cover the payouts to the big unions or all the exemptions being handed out for ObamaCare. If we are going to talk the outflow of tax payer dollars here, let’s talk about the big time stuff. That clinic in Minnesota doesn’t even reach the level of a pimple on the ass of the outflow of my money and your money.
Ha ha. I read on some website today that Bachann’s toadies are upset that people are discussing “pray away the gay” rather than Bachman’s solution to our economic woes. They don’t want her brilliant ideas to become sidetracked by talking about “gay” issues. Bwa ha ha. These are the same wingnuts that have made electioneering by using “God, guns, and gays” an art form! What has the far right, family values crew harped on if not these subjects? Now they’re suddenly interested in the economy! Yeah, because they’re afraid they’re going to be handed their heads on platters in the next election.
Let me make this clear, there is nothing wrong with being gay, it is how society TREATS gay people that is the problem. Once again, who cares what two consenting adults do in their bedroom.
Bachmann^
Politics, where only men and liberal women need apply.
how’s that “not gonna raise the debt ceiling” blather going for Bachaman?
@Wolverine, and from where I am sitting, I have been watching that conservative female try to knee cap many Democrats including the president. If she dishes it out, she needs to learn to take it.
And if one penny of taxpayer money went towards ‘pray away the gay’ I would be outraged.
If conservatives (and I know all don’t espouse this practice.) are going to howl about contraception at Planned Parenthood then they need to expect non culture warriors to complain about abstinence based programs and pray away the gay counselling at tax payer expense. I think I am saying it works both ways.
Where was the outrage over how Hillary was treated? How about a vice presidential candidate being called ‘Tits?’
Just asking.
Emma, Hillary was treated very disrespectful, even though I wouldn’t exactly call her a liberal woman. She was asked things no man would be asked. Even Sarah Palin stated Hillary was a real trailblazer.
Would we be discussing Pray Away the Gay if Bachmann were a man instead of a woman running for office? Yes.
So, can you show me the discrimination here, Elena? Do you have evidence that gays are being hogtied and dragged into that clinic to be cured by prayer? And, if they do go in there like that one young fellow on the ABC video and do not like what they hear, are they being taken hostage and not allowed to leave until “cured”? Honest to God, it’s gotten to the point that, whenever the LGBT or any other gay group gives a peep of discontent about anything, the cries of “evil discrimination” come flying out automatically. Seems to me that, in a situation like that clinic, you can just give them the finger if you wish and walk out, never to darken their door again. But not now. There are those who find nothing wrong with being gay and support gay rights. And there are those who believe that it is wrong to a lesser or greater extent, depending on the tenets of their individual religious faith. So, what is the proposal here? Drag the latter before a modern day equivalent of the Inquisition and try to force them to change the tenets of their faith or else?
“Bachmann’s toadies” and “wingnuts.” That really elevates the tone of conversation here, Censored. So, what are you? An “Obama toadie” and an “Obama wingnut”?
Bachmann is a bigot who hates gays. Her position will cost her the Presidency if she gets the Republican nomination.
The point is well-proven in just this thread that conservative women get way more scrutiny and ridicule than even the most conservative man. Women have come so far!
Emma, women have come far enough that we don’t have to accept any lousy candidate merely because she has a vagina. Do you expect us to vote the “gender ticket”?
Wolverine, I’m a social liberal (progressive, socialist, commie, whatever other label you’d like to apply) and more of a fiscal conservative. Your speech may be cleaner than mine, but the jabs at the opposition are still there.
I don’t see that clinic as being any different than the tent revival that my best friend’s dad took us to when we were kiddos except the preachers weren’t raking in federal funds.
The role religion will play will be interesting to watch. Herman Cain, a Baptist, repeated yesterday that local communities have the right to ban the construction of mosques and he would not appoint Muslims to his administration. Michelle Bachmann, who makes a lot of her strong and unwavering faith, resigned from the Salem Lutheran Church where her family had been members for more than a decade just a few days before announcing her candidacy. The church is part of a branch whose doctrine includes, “We identify the Antichrist as the Papacy. This is an historical judgment based on Scripture.” Adhering to a belief that Catholics are led by the Antichrist would be a liability for a Republican candidate given their influence in the conservative movement. And then you have Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman who are Mormon, which seems to hang over them in an awkward fashion that many find uncomfortable but don’t want to touch. It seems it’s not just a question of having faith; it’s a question of having the right faith to appease those who view faith as a key factor in whether they can support a candidate.
As for the scrutiny on Bachmann, I don’t believe it is a gender issue, it’s a product of her surge in the polls and being crazy. We used to go after Newt pretty hard until he imploded his campaign and fell off the radar. I pay attention to Romney since he’s a frontrunner, too, but while I don’t agree with some of his views I haven’t heard anything that made my head spin like the marriage pledge Bachmann signed that notes the positive family values quality slavery had on African-American children. When you choose to thrown your hat in the ring for president you have to know your life is going to be under a microscope.
Moe hit the nail on the head. Bachmann makes one’s head spin because of her extreme religious views that have merged with politics. She is trying to back away from that now and she hopes we weren’t paying attention. Some of us were and will bring these things to the forefront.
I am not wild about Mitt Romney’s policy platform either but I was enraged over the weekend when ‘Ainsley’ or some name like that on Faux and friends said that Mitt Romney wasn’t a Christian. Seriously. She said that. Please tell me how any newscaster/commentator gets to decide who is or is not Christian.
She corrected herself an hour or so later but still. What a nerve. The Mormon Church’s official name is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Who do critics think Jesus Christ in the title is? That is the kind of snobbery often found in religions that makes me sick. Christians seem to have a real bad habit of sitting in judgement of each other as to who is or is not a ‘good Christian.’
@Emma
Oh now Emma – let’s be honest. Churches don’t proivide all of that (schooling, food, medical care, shelter, job training, counseling, disaster relief and adoption services). And they sure as hell don’t do it for FREE. Schooling? I guess All Saints tuition is for free? MEDICAL CARE??? Yeah the Catholic/Baptist/Christian Scientist/Jewish Medical System/Hospitals does it all out of the kindness of their hearts….. COUNSELING???? Are you kidding me? A few words with a priest/Rabbi do not cure all ills in one’s life – especially if that individual is mentally ill.
I know they provide food services for the poor, volunteer disaster relief and help place children in homes AMONST THEIR OWN PARISHIONERS or people of SAME FAITH – but aren’t you being a bit disingenuous (sp?) about them doing EVERYTHING and deserving of tax monies? After all – churches are tax exempt – so why should they receive TAX money?
As I know how vehement you are against Planned PArenthood getting tax money… I OTOH sure as hell don’t want my tax money going to promote or support ANY faith-based organization (and I don’t care what religion) that pays NO tax, but somehow thinks it is worthy of MY tax money because “it does good things in the name of the lord”
Be good for goodness sake and drop the pretense of GAWDALMITEEE.
DAMN STRAIGHT it goes BOTH WAYS. You don’t want tax $$$$ going to Planned Parenthood or other such organization -you hadf better be prepared for others to have some say so in tax money going to faith-based intiatives or snake-oil BS like pray-away-the-gay or “abstinence only” crap.
@Emma
Yep All that criticism about Hillary was just plain cordiality. All that talk about Elizabeth Warren – compliments. Rachel Maddow, (the late) Ann Richards, Madeline Allbright, etc… Those women were never demonized or ridiculed publicly because they were/are of the left. And Chelsea Clinton – well, we all know that she was bathed in a golden light in the media for just having been the daughter of Bill & Hillary…nary a bad thing said about her when she was 13 and living in the WH.
PLEASE.
All political women are harpooned in the media. Not saying that makes it right, but it’s unavoidable.
Wolverine, I think many of us feel that gays have gotten short-changed. Just in my lifetime I have seen huge gains made in what most of us would call human rights. When I was a student of Psychology back in the dark ages, being gay was listed as a psychological disorder. It no longer is. Gays were barred from many jobs, if not explicitly, then by the unspoken word we often call the culture of a company or institution.
Cuccinelli last year restricted state institutions from applying sexual orientation to the list of protected classes. Obviously gays don’t get the same civil rights as the rest of us in that they cannot marry in this state. Marriage opens up many legal perks that non marrieds (is that like ‘illegals?’) don’t get.
So back to my point….if being gay is no longer defined as a psychological anomoly or malfunction, why is it being treated at our expense? Planned parenthood wasn’t performing abortions at our expense either but there sure is a strong wind coming to blow any medicaid funding away from them.
I’d say Nancy Pelosi hasn’t fared well here.
Wolverine,
Gay people are often in a very vulnerable place when they seek help, ergo the high rate of teenage suicide amoung gay people. Maybe you should do some research on how the LBGBT struggles to deal with their “differences” within an intolerable society.
Going to counseling and seeking help does not translate into not wanting to be gay.
Excellent point, Juturna. Pelosi has been vilified crucified and harpooned in the media.
Look at the pictures that are published of her. Not flattering.
@Not Me, Bubba That’s an awful lot of CAPS, Bubba. It’s fun to wind you up and watch you GO!!!
Interesting to see Hillary brought up time and again. She was done in by her very own party when Barack Obama became their darling.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306477,00.html
Ouch.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/archive/236/news/2008/07/13/hillary_clintons_20m_mental_re_7691.html
Double ouch.
Maybe I was wrong. Maybe the issue is that DEMOCRATS (sorry, Bubba) are the ones who won’t tolerate a woman for President. Even one who wears pantsuits.
O.K., “Censored the Commie” it shall be — but solely at the witnessed suggestion of the addressee. I am operating here under the assumption that, when an addressee puts his or her stamp of approval on a particular title to be applied to himself or herself, that is within the rules of the blog, no?
Elena — You will not find me denying that Gays have had a tough time in trying to reach some level of acceptance and equality in this society. However, it ought to be quite evident that, by using the political and judicial tools made available to them and, indeed, to all of us, by the Constitution, they have made progress in their goals. Witness the flag flying in Richmond. Witness the approaching end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Witness the recent decisions in New York and elsewhere on Gay marriage.
There is, however, a certain attitude among some in the LGBT community which I find rather objectionable. To be openly Gay in this society and to push for their causes as they have done and are doing means, in essence, that they are following a road which has long been at variance with societal mores. In so doing, they will run up against many who believe from the depths of their religious faith that homosexuality, especially in the actual practice of it, is wrong. It is one thing for the Gays to win battles on the official playing fields. But, in my opinion, it as wrong for Gays to take an approach that says that, those who oppose homosexality on grounds of faith, are somehow evil bigots. In fact, I have seen the expression “morally depraved” thrown at Christian believers by a Gay website out our way.
Oh, really, my friends? Someone who follows their own moral beliefs rather than moral beliefs dictated by you is to be classified as “depraved”? Such audacity!! You say that this is what you want and that, those who oppose you on grounds of faith must toss away the tenets of their faith and figuratively kiss your asses — just because that is what you want? And, because they will not bow to your demands, they must be labelled as bigots? How about just the “”opposition” — which has the same right as you to use the political and judicial tools available in the Constitution to fight for their own cause? Got news for you friends. There will always be those who oppose your views for reasons of genuine faith, even if you may win the battles in the legislatures and the courts. Live with it.
@Wolverine Well stated. I’m a lot more liberal when it comes to gay rights, but you are right on and, as always, eloquently so.
Apparently, those that want to distract us from the real issues of the day have succeeded. Who cares about that clinic? Simple solution. Stop funding it. Stop funding faith based services. Stop funding the PP. Stop the funding. The federal government has no actual authority to give our money to ANYONE. The earliest arguments about pensions for widows decided this. There is nothing in the Constitution that states tax money can be given away to others.
It can be used is specific ways, including gov’t pensions. It can be spent on gov’t duties. Since we can’t seem to agree who should get this money for services, NO ONE should get it or ALL should get it.
Except, of course, that WE’RE BROKE.
“Except, of course, that WE’RE BROKE.”
Just a minor, trifling detail, really.
Beef of the Day:
“Please take the character assassination of the President of the United States to another blog. I don’t want your crap here.” MH, July 18th 2011 at 15:05; #18.
“… It’s a product of her surge in the polls and being crazy…” MD, July 18th, 2011 at 7:41; #30.
“Moe hit the nail on the head…” MH, July 18th, 2011 at 8:47; #31
Excuse me for interrupting here, but I am finding the rules of the blog just a bit confusing. Are there two sets of rule books, one for liberals and one for conservatives? I came back recently from seeing a good defense of Toddy Puller on Virginia Virtucon, only to find “toadies” and “wingnuts” and “charlatan” and “crazy” right here at homebase — not to mention a bit of language seldom heard since I was on Shore Patrol in Olongapo hauling drunken sailors out of the girlie bars. Now, excuse me while I go “shit on my hands.”
No one here other than the person I spoke to has called the president of the United States a liar. I also would not have liked it said about President Bush. If someone wants to say the president lied about X, Y and Z because of abc, that’s one thing. To just character assassinate any president without reason is not acceptable.
Additionally, the remarks were not part of an on-going discussion. That was a drive by.
And if remarks are too offensive, I take them down, usually without ceremony. By this stage of the game, I rarely discuss it.
Wolverine remind me to tell you the story of a Silver Dollar, a Zippo, a pair of pliers and a bar girl from Sin City Subi sometime. (you do remember how the dancers used to pick up their tips, don’t you?)
@Cato, I have heard those stories and I for one, don’t believe it is possible. 🙄
@Cato the Elder
Don’t be to sure…..
Many a sailor and Marine have vague memories of the Phillipines…….”I KNOW we left the ship……next thing I knew we were on our way to ___________”(Name of next port or duty station) Wha’ happened?
Wolverine, I think the Toddy Puller situation is quite different from any of the remarks on here. In fact, its different from just about anything I have ever seen in politics.
I wasn’t necessarily agreeing that Bachmann is crazy. I don’t necessarily think she is. I just think she is weird.
As for the crass language, Do I have to start dealing with cussing too? I would rather not. I have taken remarks down that I felt were repulsive. That one didn’t tickle my gag-o-meter. How about if you all feel language is too crash, call the person out yourselves. If I think it is too crass, it will just disappear.
Slowpoke and I have had this agreement for a long time. 😉 Good understanding. I don’t do bathroom or nasal humor.
Subic Bay, Philippines 1968
“Eyewitness confirms Tip Comment”
I was young, it was war…
Man, you guys, don’t get me started, or I’ll get banned from this place for sure. There was this bar — “East Wind” I think it was called — scummiest joint in the Orient. I’d better shut up. Suffice it to say that things got so wild at one point when I was there that the CO of Subic Base initiated a midnight curfew for all military personnel. And these were people coming out of Nam with wads of back pay in their pockets.
Nothing wrong with a good game of “smiles.” 😈
Well, it is always amusing to see you shirk away from your original claims. I’ll gather the only thing you found wrong in my post was my decision to use capitalization. ROTFLMAO…(oops…caps again….). But I’ll take your diversion as concurrence with my claims.
Hillary was done in by her own party? Correct me if I am wrong, but she is Secretary of state, NO? The way you’re going on you make it sound like she was ditched and left without a job…
But you do prove my point – women, regardless of party are lampooned, harpooned and landblasted in the media. SOmeone else mentioned Pelosi….and then there was that representative Cynthia Brooks (?) from Georgia who made a fuss being searched before she was allowed into Capitol hill….and I do believe the media ran with THAT one as well, degrading her on a more personal level than might have been done to a man.
Are you suggesting Hillary would have been a better President than Barack, but somehow her vagina got in the way? I can just imagine conservatives saying the exact same thing had Hillary won – Democrats couldn’t handle a Black Man as President. If circular argumentation is all you have, you haven’t much at all.
It’s like claiming Conservatives are so concerned with womens’ issues – FOR WOMEN …and it must be true because they embrace Sarah Palin and Bachmann. It doesn’t hold water.
And while I get your digs on me about Democrats – as if your statements against them are supposed to upset me – you may as well stop spinning your wheels. I am no party whore who defends their political flavor brands with vehemency or passion – unlike others…. I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I can see that they are one in the same, minus a few social issues, so you can cut the crap. Political women – of either Red or Blue – are held under more media and public scrutiny than their male counterparts because this nation has a history and liking of witch burning.
I don’t care for Hillary and her corporate pals, nor do I think Bachmann or Palin have an ounce of logic in their heads. But go ahead and climb back up on that conservative persecution cross you hang from…it seems you like it.