WASHINGTON – As part of the American Psychological Association’s (APA) LGBT activist agenda, it has created a task force to refute monogamous marriage and to normalize “consensual non-monogamous” relationships, which it refers to as Consensual Non-Monogamy (CNM). CNM includes polygamy and polyamory (group sexual relations, including “swinging.”) In fact, the APA task force has a petition to make people with multiple sexual partners a protected class (“I support including consensual non-monogamy as a legally protected class).

The Task Force on Consensual Non-Monogamy “promotes awareness and inclusivity about consensual non-monogamy and diverse expressions of intimate relationships. These include but are not limited to: people who practice polyamory, open relationships, swinging, relationship anarchy and other types of ethical, non-monogamous relationships.” (emphasis added).

Photo taken from Consensual Non-Monogamy Task Force Facebook Page: “Before I die I want to normalize consensual non-monogamy.”

The APA, which has over 110,000 members, continues to allow a small group of sex anarchists to define its positions on sexuality, instead of being a source for objective scientific information on sexuality or gender. According to the APA’s official description of this recent initiative, “Finding love and/or sexual intimacy is a central part of most people’s life experience. However, the ability to engage in desired intimacy without social and medical stigmatization is not a liberty for all.”

The task force’s “peer-reviewed and historic consensual non-monogamous (CNM) literature studies,” including research on polyamory by Ken Haslam, are based on the works of Alfred C. Kinsey, the 1940-50s Indiana University sex addict who is known as the father of the sexual revolution. The sexologist founded The Kinsey Institute in 1953 and it continues to “work toward advancing sexual health and knowledge worldwide.” However, the methods Kinsey used were unethical, including sexual experiments and abuse on infants, and the statistically and scientifically fraudulent “data” is derived from serial child rapists, sex offenders, prisoners, prostitutes, pedophiles, and pederasts. 

Heath Schechinger, the co-chair of the Task Force on CNM states, “I’m concerned about the lack of support this community is receiving. Too many clients who are in CNM relationships have to educate their therapists. Too many of them discontinue therapy because their therapist judged them, didn’t know enough about CNM to be helpful, or worse, makes actively stigmatizing comments…It’s time to examine our biases and take a non-judgmental posture toward clients engaged in consensual non-monogamy — just as we would with LGBTQ clients.” 

The Task Force on CNM follows the same agenda as the one APA created to conduct a “systematic review of the peer-reviewed journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates.” The APA’s’ Task Force Report on “Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation” (2009) has been presented as “scientific evidence” and trumped all other credible information in many courtrooms regarding the effectiveness of counseling for unwanted same-sex desires and behavior.  

Instead of an objective APA Task Force Committee, six of the seven members have publicly documented they identify as LGBT.  The seventh engaged in homosexual activism before selection for the task force. Beside this bias, prior to the start of their investigation the task force members admitted to being opposed to the fact that counseling can help those struggling with same-sex desires and behavior, based on their perspective that homosexuality must be viewed by others as “positive.”

Hence, the APA rejected five qualified practitioners of talk therapy who applied for that task force committee. When asked why those applicants were rejected, the chairperson of the task force said, “They were not rejected, they just were not accepted.”

The 2009 NARTH Committee Response to the APA report concluded that the “APA’s labeling of homosexuality as ‘normal’ is a value judgment which, contrary to the task force’s assertion, does not come from science.” The NARTH committee also revealed that the bias in the APA report is further evidenced by the task force’s failure to reveal the well-documented, increased level of pathology associated with a homosexual lifestyle and the decision not to study individuals who reported treatment success.

Liberty Counsel’s Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The Task Force on so-called ‘Consensual Non-Monogamy’ is more evidence that the American Psychological Association has lost it way. The same people who want to deny counseling for people with unwanted same-sex desires or confusion also want to promote sexual anarchy and make ‘open relationships’ a protected class. It’s time to call out the APA for its unscientific bias that is harmful to people.”

You May Also Like

C.S. Lewis: Atheism is Too Simple

British apologist and professor of literature at Oxford University, Clive Staples Lewis…

Stop Calling Conservative Groups Hate Groups

That is the unexpected call from Dana Milbank a liberal columnist for…

Dwight L. Moody: A Masterpiece of the Devil

American evangelist Dwight L. Moody (1837-1899) said about teaching children about Jesus:…

Iowa’s Big Abortion Circle of “Scratch-My-Back” Continues

Why is The Des Moines Register presenting only one side of the abortion debate and not printing (or altering severely) Iowa Right to Life’s letters to the editor?