Featured Image

October 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Proponents of the so-called “conversion therapy bans” cropping up in many Western countries have a very simple and very compelling public rationalization for these laws. These laws, they claim, are necessary to prevent young people from being forced into dangerous and discredited therapies that attempt to alter who they are. The phrase “conversion therapy,” which has generally been used to refer to abusive practices such as electroshock therapy and conjures up ugly images almost immediately, has been used very intentionally. What humane person, after all, could oppose banning that? Even the United Nations has called on member nations to get on board.

Of course, these so-called “conversion therapy bans” are actually designed to do far more than ban practices that already attract universal condemnation. The bylaw recently passed in Calgary, for example, could jail parents and criminalize Christian speech, as even having pastoral conversations about unwanted same-sex attraction or genuine gender confusion could be covered. Based on definitions of “hate” and “cruelty” used by most LGBT activists, it is safe to assume that this is their intention. The “conversion therapy ban” currently being proposed by Trudeau’s Liberals could theoretically send parents to jail for opposing sex changes for their children. 

The same laws are cropping up in the United Kingdom—and members of post-Christian churches are coming forward as key advocates. Back in July, a letter signed by the Moderator of the Baptist Union Rev. David Mayne, the Bishop of Liverpool Rev. Paul Bayes, and other religious leaders called on Prime Minister Boris Johnson to propose legislation that covered “the full range of religious practices” and stated explicitly that conversations between congregants and religious leaders on sinful sexual practices were putting lives at risk. Religious communities, they stated, needed to be forced into change: 

Whilst we recognise and applaud your overall aim to “end conversion therapy” we would caution you that this will not be possible until our religions have done more theological thinking on these matters – which we and others are committed to helping them do. 

In fact, the signatories actually stated that even conversations that were wanted and initiated by those struggling with unwanted attraction should be banned, and orthodox clergy prosecuted:

We urge you to make it clear that the UK will not tolerate those who practice conversion therapy in any form, whether consensual or not, and that those who practice it will be prosecuted.  This will have the impact of causing religious leaders to think twice, as they will be loath to risk having a criminal record that would stop them from following their vocation.

In short, the signatories of the letter echoed 2017 calls by the Church of England to ban “conversion therapy”—but took it even further by calling on legislation that would essentially outlaw calls for sexual chastity as Christians have understood it for 2,000 years. 

Now, former evangelical and current progressive quisling Steve Chalke has joined the attack on orthodox Christian communities, stating in a press release put out by the UK charity Oasis Trust that even traditionally Christian expressions of support for those struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction and the offer of prayers was “psychologically abusive,” and stated that Christian teaching on sexuality that taught people “that their desires are ‘sinful’” is dangerous because it “only contributes to the already high levels of mental health issue reported among people from the LGBT+ community.”

I’ve suspected for some time that these so-called “conversion therapy bans” are simply a Trojan horse that can effectively be used to render preaching, teaching, pastoral support, and Christian counseling on any LGBT-related issue illegal. If a person who identifies as LGBT hears a sermon, or asks advice and is told not to act on desires, or even asks if he or she should seek to live chastely—any response that adheres to the orthodox Christian position on sexuality could result in prosecution. You’ll notice that advocates of these laws consistently and specifically cite suicide as a result of people being told their desire are sinful. This is intentional: It allows them to say that Christian speech is quite literally life-threatening. The fact that this is nonsense isn’t relevant.

I’ve often been told that my concerns are hyperbolic. But here, for your consideration, are advocates for conversion therapy bans openly advocating for the prosecution of Christians—and some leaders even suggesting that religious people must be forced into literally changing their theology by government crackdown and criminal records. That is what these people are saying. We know why they want these bans. They are telling us what they are for. They are not to protect LGBT people. They are to target us.

Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he interviews Marjorie Dannenfelser from the Susan B. Anthony List who tells Van Maren that this election is crucial for the pro-life movement. Dannenfelser warns listeners that if the Democrats win, it will have a generational impact, as the left will fight to take away the core principles of our nation's founding.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: No to government and corporate penalties for refusing COVID-19 vaccine
  Show Petition Text
103153 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

                                                                                                                      **Photo credit:

Mainstream media sources are promoting offensive suggestions by some doctors that people who refuse a vaccine for COVID-19 should be "punished" by the government and by business - effectively coercing them into taking the vaccine.

  • One group of doctors writing in 'USA Today' suggested that the government impose special taxes (i.e., fines) on people who refuse the vaccination and that business simply refuse to serve them. [see story below]
  • Another doctor writing in an online publication called 'The Conversation' shamelessly suggested that people who refuse a vaccine should be given a psychoactive drug to induce compliance. [see story below]

But, these suggestions are plain political posturing, and have nothing to do with science or with the recent trends of the disease.

And, in case they haven't noticed, we live in a democracy not a medical dictatorship!

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks policy-makers and business people, at all levels, to pledge to respect the rights of those who, in good conscience, decide not to vaccinate themselves or their children.

People should not have to live in fear of governmental or corporate retribution for refusing a vaccine which is being rushed to market by Big Pharma and their fellow-travelers in NGOs, like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

It would be intolerable and immoral for the government or business to coerce someone, and their family, to take a COVID vaccine against their will to avoid a fine, or just so they can do their weekly grocery shopping.

Medical freedom must be respected in principle and also in practice.

So, it is now time that our policy-makers listen to all voices involved in this vital conversation, and start to represent those who will not tolerate being punished for refusing a vaccine.

Simply put, legislatures must begin to act as legislatures again.

Questions must be asked. Hearings and investigations must be held. And, the legislatures of each state and country must return to the business of representing the people who voted for them, assuming their rightful place as the originator of legislation.

We can no longer accept the dictates of executive branches without question, especially now that, statistically speaking, the initial brunt of the COVID crisis has passed.

Neither can we accept the dictates of doctors who seem detached from reality and from science, and who only seem to be attached to the idea of promoting ideas which contribute to the agrandizement of power and control of political interests, and wealth of those who stand to make a lot of money from the sale of a COVID vaccine.

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks government and business leaders to pledge to respect the rights of those who refuse a COVID vaccine, and not seek to punish them for doing so.


'Doctors lay out plan to ‘punish’ people who refuse coronavirus vaccine: ‘There is no alternative’' -

'US professor: ‘Psychoactive pill’ should be covertly administered to ensure lockdown compliance' -

  Hide Petition Text

You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below: 

Featured Image

Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States.

He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.