Kansas City repeals ban on conversion therapy after pressure from Missouri attorney general 58%

By Noah Taborda0%

5/22/2026, 8:54:27 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Indoctrination, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 30.2% saturation with 159 hits. Analysis detected 1,086 faulty-reasoning hits from 526 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.4% and a BS Rank of 58% (9,341 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.30% of the article peer group.

Kansas City repeals ban on conversion therapy after pressure from Missouri attorney general 
City Council members on Thursday repealed a ban on the controversial practice that was first approved in 2019. 
The split decision comes after a group of Christian counselors and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey sued the city. 
Licensed professionals will once again be allowed to perform so-called conversion therapy on minors, after the Kansas City council repealed a previous ban on Thursday. 
The scientifically discredited practice seeks to “convert” LGBTQ+ minors to a heterosexual lifestyle, and leading scientific organizations like the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association all strongly condemn the practice. 
The 7-5 decision, which came late Thursday evening, wasn’t made happily, and several council members voted against the ordinance in protest. 
But the majority recognized they had little choice. 
Passage was needed to avoid future legal challenges and potentially address an ongoing lawsuit. 
Earlier this year, a group of Christian counselors and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey sued the city over the ban. 
And last month, the U.S. 
Supreme Court ruled a similar ban in Colorado may be unconstitutional, though the decision technically does not strike down the law. 
“I understand the point of this, but conversion therapy is harmful and there's a reason why we banned this,” said 4th District Council member Eric Bunch, who voted against the repeal. 
Wyatt Bury and Pamela Eisenreich, both counselors who filed the lawsuit, claim the now-repealed city ordinance violates their free speech. 
Their lawsuit also targets Jackson County, where there has been a similar ban in place since 2023. 
Former Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr. said in a statement in February 2025 that the county would stand by its policy. 
White was later recalled by voters. 
"We will defend our law banning the harmful practice of conversion therapy to the fullest extent of the law,” he said. 
“This ordinance reflects our unwavering belief that every individual deserves to live authentically, free from coercive and damaging practices disguised as therapy." 
The Kansas City Neighborhood Planning and Development Committee first recommended the city’s conversion therapy ban be repealed on Tuesday. 
In reaction to that decision, Holmeswood Church lead pastor David McDaniel voiced his concerns on Facebook. 
“No child should be taught to fear or reject who they are,” McDaniel posted. 
“When faith is used to deepen shame instead of protect life, the church and the citizens of this city must speak clearly: love does not erase people, it calls them beloved.” 
With their vote to repeal the ban on Thursday, Kansas City Council members have agreed that businesses and other organizations will also no longer face penalty for misgendering someone, or refusing to use someone’s stated pronouns. 
Mayor Quinton Lucas, who voted in favor of the repeal, told Council members they could revisit the issue down the road. 
“I would always be happy for us to write a new piece of legislation that avoids the types of legal challenges coming our way,” he said. 
“It would be difficult but, nonetheless, that is always an option.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.4%Noah Taborda: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias15.4%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Noah Taborda: 3.0%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic4.2%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 4.0%Noah Taborda: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 30.2%Noah Taborda: 3.3%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect30.2%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.8%Noah Taborda: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.0%Noah Taborda: 6.1%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias7.0%This article: 9.9%Noah Taborda: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias9.9%This article: 25.5%Noah Taborda: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias25.5%This article: 4.0%Noah Taborda: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias4.0%This article: 1.5%Noah Taborda: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error1.5%This article: 4.0%Noah Taborda: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias4.0%This article: 3.0%Noah Taborda: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Noah Taborda: 2.2%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect6.8%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.8%Noah Taborda: 4.5%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority6.8%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.6%Noah Taborda: 4.7%Columbia Missourian: 5.2%Appeal to Emotion8.6%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.6%Noah Taborda: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.6%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 2.7%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 18.4%Noah Taborda: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)18.4%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.1%Noah Taborda: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground2.1%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.9%Noah Taborda: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote9.9%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 12.7%Noah Taborda: 1.8%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice12.7%This article: 16.9%Noah Taborda: 3.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination16.9%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Noah Taborda: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

526 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers48%attributed speech272writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageEric Bunch • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWyatt Bury • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageFrank White Jr. • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageFrank White Jr. • 21 words • 100.0% coverageFrank White Jr. • 22 words • 100.0% coverageKansas City Neighborhood Planning and Development Committee • 19 words • 0.0% coverageHolmeswood Church • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDavid McDaniel • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDavid McDaniel • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageQuinton Lucas • 21 words • 0.0% coverageQuinton Lucas • 26 words • 0.0% coverageQuinton Lucas • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

David McDaniel

100%flagged-word coverage
45 attributed words18% of attributed speech85% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Biased Writer Voice+55.7 ptsWriter: 13.2%David McDaniel: 68.9%68.9%Indoctrination+55.7 ptsWriter: 13.2%David McDaniel: 68.9%68.9%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.