The debate rages on over the homeopathic treatment of homosexuality.
I get some troubling comments from my friend.
Homeopath Mark O’Sullivan writes:
I’ve been discussing this article with Kaviraj and Vinton McCabe on Facebook. Kaviraj just posted this response to your referring to him in this article on my FB profile. I thought it would be worth re-posting.
The following is from Kaviraj
“I can speak for myself. What I say or do not say is my prerogative. I find this discussion in bad taste and I demand you cease and desist using my name to make your case. I happen to disagree with a lot of what you say here. So do not associate me with your views, because then you are dishonest towards the public. You do not have my permission. I disagree 100% with your conclusions and the tone you set, but I shall defend the right to do so equally 100%, as long as you leave my name out. I do not support your conclusions.
“I have never stated that I see it as something to cure.
“To me a cure is peace of mind for the patient and that is regardless which sexuality he chooses, to have that peace of mind. Some in my clinic have chosen to be hetero and others to remain homosexual. If a person is happy to be so, who am I, trying to change that? So I never tried to change people and let them chose for themselves.
“And I only treat those who come to me of their own free will. Mandatory treatment? Sounds much like a Big Pharma/Big Brother idea to me.
“VD Kaviraj ”
Also, for your readers, a relevant blog post by Vinton McCabe in response to this recent troubling direction you’ve been taking with your writing.
“Homeopathy, Allopathy, Skeptics & That Amazing Old Randi–All’s Fair in Love & War & ‘Homeophobia’?”
Mark O’Sullivan Lic.I.S.H. ISHom
Well okay then, I’ll rescind my nomination of Kaviraj for the Nobel prize for his work in curing some people of homosexuality . . and nominate Carol Boyce for it instead.
Ullman hotly contends the article is a spoof, and when I asked him if it would be right to say he did not know of any cases, either of his own or anyone elses, where after homeopathic treatment a homosexual became heterosexual or lost his homosexual impulses, he replied “that is right.”
He has demanded an apology: Okay, Dana, I’m sorry this has offended you.
But something doesn’t sound right. I do a quick check and find that he has written there are homeopathic remedies for homosexuality, most notably Lachesis.
REMEDY FOR HOMOSEXUALITY
“Lachesis is one of the few homeopathic remedies known for its homosexuality,” writes Dana Ullman. “Kent lists it as ‘aversion of men to women’ and ‘falls in love with member of her own sex.’
On a well known UK homeopathy discussion group email list, Boyce has reported people being cured of it.
“I have also treated many who would identify as homosexual and I have the same experience as Kaviraj,” says Boyce, “those who are in anguish resolve that anguish – some by ‘going straight’ since that is their natural state – others by remaining homosexual in their gender preference but released from the agony of confusion and feeling of oppression and able to live healthy meaningful lives.”
Vis a vis, Kaviraj says he’s seen heterosexuals become homosexuals after homeopathic treatment.
“If the patient says he has troubles with being something he feels he is not, but is driven by something outside of his control,” says Kaviraj, “then that is the only thing I need to consider as a physician. If that something is homosexuality, either in the male or female, I have to take that serious, if I am to be a good homoeopath. And I have the duty to cure him of this thing and it is none of my business whether he will come to accept or reject it, as long as it no longer troubles him. If that makes me a homophobe, I shall
wear that badge with honour.”
O’Sullivan says, “To me a cure is peace of mind for the patient and that is regardless which sexuality he chooses . .”
What? Before we push the button on your applause sign, isn’t the common belief WE ARE BORN THAT WAY!
So when did we become choosers?
Is O’Sullivan trying to tell us we choose our diseases? If he believes that, isn’t it his responsibility as a physician to warn us of what statistically the consequences may be of that choice?
Or, if we have fallen into a hopeless state, believing that it is genetic, like Republicanism, that it is not what allopathy would have us believe, that it is incurable, should he not tell us that it is?
So I don’t understand what it is that Dr. O’Sullivan and others think I’m guilty of. Homophobia? Homoeophobia? And how is it relevant except to shut own the discussion of the facts? I’ve yet to see the statistics contravened.
What I have yet to hear from the pitchfork and torch wielding mob outside my door, or anyone else on O’Sullivan’s side of the gender gap, is how we explain ignoring an easily correctable condition that shortens life span by 24 years, that statistically leaves its victims depressed and in danger of committing twice as much suicide as heterosexuals.
The argument in oppostion doesn’t seem to be decided on what the actual cure is for those who desperately want it and need it: 1.) getting me to shut up or; 2.) homeopathy.
“It is also a cop-out to not look at any other possibility for this behaviour and is the sign of a lazy mind, which excuses itself by saying, ‘ah well, nothing you can do about it.’ Thus leaving people who are not happy being homosexual to their supposed fate. Now THAT is really cruel and disturbing.”
I concur. If we really love our fellow man, then between the hugs and kisses, weshould tell him what the consequences are statistically for his symptoms if he doesn’t get it fixed, if he can, without getting slapped by him or punched by her.
And he can get it fixed.
Or, prove the statistics wrong.
Until then, saints like Kaviraj and Boyce have proved it right.
There’s no acrimony here between me and this subject.
And if after reading this you’re still not convinced that I’ve been more of a cause than a cure for a man’s woes then the remedy you should use for it is JOHN BENNETH, 30c.
Send me $50 bucks and I’ll send you some.
John Benneth, Homeopath
A defintion for disease: “A particular quality, habit, or disposition regarded as adversely affecting a person or group of people.”