09-14-2012, 03:07 AM
Just saw this column at WND (formerly WorldNetDaily.) I don't agree with his overall stance on homosexuality, but should we be worried about attempts to ban such therapy? A lot of those points could apply to vision improvement as well. In particular:
Quote:âThe entire house of medicine has rejected this phony and sham therapy,â said Lieu.
Yet, if that were true, there would be no need to ban its practice. If there werenât a market for the therapy, why would legislation banning it be necessary? If there werenât practitioners making a living serving those who willingly seek out such therapy, what would be the point of a prohibition?
