A two page, single spaced letter from one legislator became the talk of the Capitol this week.

On Tuesday, the House voted 35 to 29, with Rep. Dan Thurlow, R-Grand Junction, siding with the Democratic caucus, to pass House Bill 15-1175. The bill would have prohibited state-licensed therapists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals from providing gay conversion therapy for minors under the age of 18.

“I know this is difficult for some of you,” sponsor Rep. Paul Rosenthal, D-Denver, told his House colleagues last week during second reading. “It’s a deeply personal subject. But that’s what being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered is. It’s deeply personal…It’s part of how you’re born and there’s no changing it, no matter how much you want to or want someone to help you do it.”

House Minority Leader Rep. Brian DelGrosso, R-Loveland, led the Republican arguments against the bill during second reading on March 6. DelGrosso raised concerns that the bill was too broad and would hinder therapists from being able to discuss sexual orientation with their clients.

But it was who didn’t speak in the House well who may have ended up having the loudest voice.

Between last Friday and the bill’s third reading vote Tuesday, Rep. Gordon Klingenschmitt, R-Colorado Springs, made his opinion clearly known. Klingenschmitt is not a member of the House committee that heard the bill in February, nor did he speak on the bill last week or during third reading. Instead, he wrote a letter, which he distributed to all 65 members of the House on Monday.

In his letter, Klingenschmitt said the bill had four problems. It intentionally prohibits some kinds of free speech, he argued. “Psychotherapists must talk to do their job. Words are their only tools. So when you ban certain kinds of talk therapy, you are banning certain illegal combinations of words…” The bill also takes away parental rights, he said, implying the government is smarter than trained doctors. It would limit medical options, stifle important medical communication and threaten a parent’s fundamental right to decide what is best for their minor child.

The letter also claimed HB 1175 would make private medical conversations illegal and it would indirectly restrict religious freedom, by making some voluntary religious conversions illegal. Klingenschmitt said the bill implied a person would be able to “choose whom you want to have sex with.”

Klingenschmitt also claimed the bill targeted bisexual, transgendered and those who question their sexual orientation. The bill, according to the letter, would punish the psychologist for talking about conversion every time “a transgender wants to change their gender identity.”

In this bill Democrats “want Big Government to come into your doctor’s office and then into your bedroom. They will mandate in state law that you, forever, must only have sex the same way you did yesterday, and that nobody can ever talk with a counselor about having sex a different way in the future…” he wrote. Finally, he claimed the bill would threaten freedom of the press. Psychotherapists would not be able to distribute books about conversion. “There is a manual for conversion therapy. Many of you, when you swore your oath to defend the constitution, raised your right hand to God, and you placed your left hand on that book,” implying the bill would ban the Bible.

Rosenthal told The Colorado Statesman Tuesday that he viewed the letter more as a rant than a speech, but also said the letter typifies some of the attitudes that his bill is designed to address. The letter “typifies the ignorance about LGBT issues, about growing up as an LGBT child, and how difficult that is, even in America today, the challenges children face with their identity and coming to terms with who they are, and how hard it is for parents. Hopefully this bill will help [parents] help their children come to terms with who they are and their identities.”

Rosenthal said he likes Klingenschmitt personally, but “I just don’t think this kind of document is helpful to the conversation. It’s divisive and upsetting, particularly to the LGBT members of the Legislature.”

Will the letter affect the chances of HB 1175 getting through the Senate? Rosenthal said he hopes the Senate will take a positive, fresh look at the bill, regardless of what happened when it was in the House. “My hope is that they will have a positive outlook on it,” he said.

But Klingenschmitt’s choice to write a letter, rather than speaking on the House floor, was more about Republicans not wanting him to vocalize opinions that weren’t necessarily shared by the rest of the Republican caucus and potentially embarrassing to the caucus.

DelGrosso told The Colorado Statesman Tuesday that “when you speak on third reading, you’re speaking on behalf of the caucus. I believe [the letter] was his way of saying ‘this is where I, Rep. Klingenschmitt’ feel on this issue.”

DelGrosso said the caucus had “legitimate issues” with the bill but did not share the same positions that Klingenschmitt expressed in his letter. “I was the one speaking on second reading, and I made the [caucus’s] legitimate concerns with the bill,” DelGrosso said. “I asked him to not speak on behalf of the caucus, and if he had specific views, he needed to figure out how to [express them].”

Klingenschmitt told The Statesman Tuesday that the message was directed to the other members of the House and that it was “adequate” to put it on paper. “But I am also part of a team,” he said. “I don’t personally want to speak for other members, my thoughts are my own thoughts. But I also don’t want to be disruptive to the goals of the team.”

Speaker of the House Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, D-Boulder, told The Statesman she would have granted Klingenschmitt permission to speak on third reading had he asked.

– Marianne@coloradostatesman.com