The California legislature is considering a measure which would require religious leaders to undergo professional psychological training, pay for malpractice insurance, and be licensed and approved by the state before they could offer counseling to their followers. This was prompted by the suicide of a man named Michael Larkin who had gone to a Baptist minister, Rev. T. C. Moreland, for counseling. Moreland's therapy consisted of an attempt to convert Larkin into a heterosexual. Moreland has been convicted of involunary manslaughter.
As convenient as it usually is to generalize about gay people and what our needs and concerns are, we have to keep in mind that everyone's situation is going to be slightly different, and everyone is going to have unique needs that aren't immediately obvious to the general public. That is why the general public, or its elected representatives, should never be in charge of legislating in personal matters like religion, and personal growth, where blanket regulations about what is needed and what is harmful are going to be wrong in too many particular cases.
Licensing counsellors based on the mainstream gay community's conception of the way gay people should look at themselves, is an abrogation of every gay person's right to their own religion, and conscience. I believe it's good to try to convince people to accept themselves the way they are -- by persuation and education, but never, never by force. When we have to start fining and even jailing the people who disagree with us, we only make our arguments appear weak.
When I think about what it must have been like for Larkin, how he must have hated himself, I get a knot in my stomach somewhere, and I feel angry at Moreland for giving him bad advice. I wish I could grab everyone like Larkin in the world by the shoulders and shake them and make them realize that their existence only means something if it is noticeable; pretending to feel the same things the people around you feel is as silly as people in a life raft at sea trying to disguise their boat as a wave, so as not to inconvenience any passing ships with their rescue!
Larkin was different in two ways; he was a homosexual among Christians, and a Christian among homosexuals; both are distinguishing characteristics, and if only there were a way he could have been proud of both. But for him, the two were in conflict, and he couldn't resolve it. Moreland probably wasn't much help, and maybe a pro-gay but very anti-Christian counsellor would have driven him to suicide just as surely.
What kind of counsellor would have been best for Larkin? It's hard for me to say; I never met him. Maybe Larkin would have killed himself no matter who was advising him. I can't be certain. And neither can the California Legislature.
We do need accountability among counselling professionals. I think it's perfectly appropriate for groups of concerned citizens and professionals with different interests and preferences to set professional criteria for counsellors and to provide referral and approval services. I think it's not appropriate for those groups to lobby the legislature to force everyone to abide by that group's standards alone. As a homosexual conservative Christian, Larkin would have had unique requirements in a counsellor, and I don't trust any one group of people, even the legislature or the APA, to set criteria that are right for everybody.
Larkin probably made a mistake in chosing the counsellor he did, and it led to his suicide. When people kill themselves we have to ask what went wrong and try to make things better in the future. But his ability to choose his own counsellor didn't kill him; nor did Moreland kill him. Larkin killed himself.
There are people who claim to be happy "ex-homosexuals", religiously converted into heterosexuals by faith. Frankly I don't believe it, but I support their right to try any hairbrained scheme they think will make themselves happier -- all I ask in return is that they give me the same freedom.