It's hard to understand what that sentence even means, let alone accepted as "scientifically supportable."

Since I was 11 years old, my human nature has been such that I only feel sexual and romantic attraction toward other guys. I've had two long-term relationships and raised a child with my second partner — which of course filled me with joy and and gave me a sense of fulfillment.

How is any of that contrary to my human nature?

What's contrary to human nature are these religious organizations that call for people like me to obey their religious mandates and live my life single or in a relationship where I don't feel attraction.

What's contrary to human nature is bowing down to these dehumanizing religious dictates, which are entirely arbitrary, after all ... based as they are on restrictions that arose in an ignorant, tribal society in the late iron age.

Humans are supposed to worship our ignorant past like that? Why? I for one refuse to be that ignorant.

Religion does its worst when it stifles freedom and human nature, as when religion demands that women submit to men, for example, or that women not exercise control of their own human reproduction.

The sort of extremist homophobia you're writing about, in which a would be mental-health professional tries to reject a century of scientific data — covering his eyes and sticking his fingers in is ears — to try to repress and control queer people to their proven detriment, even if the practices he promotes are coercive ... well, I can't even express how astonished and angry I feel.

Having barely escaped conversion therapy myself as a teenager, and having attempted suicide anyway as a teenager because of the despair I felt about being gay, I can only hope that the mental health industry as a whole rises up en masse to expose and condemn to this dangerous snake-oil salesman.

I would also hope the Christian world would rise us en masse to condemn the Christian Post for publishing such absurd and dangerous pseudoscience.