Laurie Higgins is a cultural affairs writer with the Illinois Family Institute.
Discussion began by looking at a division of the American Psychological Association (APA) known as ‘Division 44.’ Laurie explained that this division formed in 1985. It’s title is actually, ‘The Society for the Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity.’ She went on to note that from the title you’d think that they would be examining such issues when actually the group was started by a group of LGB psychologists and their allies with the intent to promote and deliver affirmative psychological services to the homosexual and transgender community. In other words, this organization doesn’t seek to research this topic. Instead, it’s dedicated to promoting a set of assumptions about what Laurie described as ‘deviant sexuality.’
In just the past year, ‘Division 44’ established a ‘Task Force on Consensual Non-Monogamy.’ (Non-monogamy being ‘polyamory’ which is the sexual and romantic involvement with multiple people of various sexes at the same time.)
Laurie described how ‘Division 44’ really goes back as far as 1973 when a political assault took place at an APA convention to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. It’s just continued since that time and for this reason she believes the APA is a political activist organization and should have no credibility.
She contends that as America has moved away from religion (Christianity in particular), the new arbiter of morality that is filling the gap isn’t faith, but pseudo-science and social science, both of which are unstable as we see from studies that they’ll cite and that they can’t later replicate, yet the results continue to be touted.
Jim noted how Laurie has warned that this task force equates consensual non-monogamy (such as adultery or polyamory) as just another sexual orientation. If that’s not enough, Laurie mentioned that they have a petition to have consensual non-monogamy included as a protected class.
She went on to note that this is why conservatives have argued for a long time that we shouldn’t include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination policies/laws.
It’s not that we want certain people to be treated improperly, it’s that sexual orientation will eventually include other forms of deviant sexuality and that’s exactly what we’ve been seeing. So now that protected class status for such individuals is being touted, we’re seeing this pop up in schools.
How does all of this affect the concept of marriage? When you write into law that marriage has nothing to do with biological sex and reproductive potential, there’s no way to restrict marriage to just two people. This means the legalization of plural unions will be pushed by the polyamorists. For Laurie, this isn’t a potential problem, she believes it inevitable.
So much more was covered on this issue and you can hear it all, along with responses from listeners, when you review this vital Crosstalk broadcast.