Religion as a Front for Tyranny

It is often criticized that bans on conversion therapy are “anti-religious,” that they impede on citizens' freedom of religion. To this claim I quote Margaret Atwood from the Introduction to her novel The Handmaid's Tale: “It is against the use of religion as a front for tyranny; which is a different thing altogether.”

Bans on conversion therapy are not, in and of themselves, anti-religious; bans on conversion therapy, especially those that operate through some kind of religious organization, do not, in and of themselves, threaten anyone’s freedom of religion. I, myself, having experienced conversion therapy and now advocate for these types of legal bans, still strongly believe in the value of religion and “faith.” But “conversion” practices that are enforced by religious organizations use religion as a front for tyranny; which is a different thing altogether. Religion, for these organizations and the people who run them, is erroneously conflated with opinions of ignorance and hatred, and so any opposition to what they say or do around issues of sexuality or gender are understood to be opposition to religion. It is not.

Opposition to religious organizations that enforce conversion treatments is opposition to their use of religion as a front for tyranny. The difference is subtle but vast, and I sincerely hope that all governments, both local and federal, currently or in the future considering any kind of legal ban on conversion therapy, understand this difference. Religious-based organizations that enforce any kind of conversion treatment tyrannize people into conformity; legal bans of their treatments oppose this tyranny, not religion.