Ex-Gay Watch

Here’s wishing each of you a joyous and safe celebration and a happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year

Exodus and other ex-gay groups tell parents that they should love their gay children. And their resources are abundant with advice that if you reject your child, you’ll lose your child. And if you never have your children around, you can’t witness to them that “change is possible”.

Much of the advice is useful and caring – provided that you come from the position that sexual orientation is fluid and homosexuality is inherently sinful in all circumstances.

But with the discussions about love there are also discussions about boundaries and discipline. Minors are to be what their parents desire, even if that includes a stay at an ex-gay camp. And acceptance of a gay child is never to include acceptance of their orientation.

But what should a parent do if their child is an adult but still living under their roof? Though I saw much advice for parents of adult children living apart and of minor children at home, I didn’t see a solution for a parent that finds out that their college age child is gay.

Do you kick them out? Do you cut off their finances?

That is the response of many parents, as I’m sure readers here could testify. But that can have tragic consequences.

One mother wrote this week to Between the Lines, a gay weekly newspaper in Michigan to tell the story about her son whom she kicked out of her home a year ago.

I told my son that he had to leave my house, that I could not approve of his behavior. I told him that he could come home when he decided to act like the son that his father and I had given birth to.

In this upcoming year I would encourage any of our readers who participate in ex-gay ministries or have other access to parents of gay children to requestion their priorities.

Do you spend as much time, effort, and money on telling parents to love as you do on fighting “the homosexual agenda”? Do your billboards, advertisements, and quotes in the newspaper tell others to care for gay people or are they solely for a culture war agenda?

Perhaps this new year would be a good time for all of us to resolve to heal as much as we attack and to love as much as we condemn.

Reason Magazine, a periodical with a strongly libertarian bent, has an article by Maia Szalavitz that discusses the forebears of ex-gay live-in program Love In Action/Refuge. The focus of the article is on teenage drug rehabilitation programs but some of the tactics will sound very familiar to those who monitor the actions of LIA/R.

But like the drug war itself, tough love programs are ineffective, based on pseudoscience, and rooted in a brutal ideology that produces more harm than most of the problems they are supposedly aimed at addressing. The history of tough love shows how fear consistently trumps data, selling parents and politicians on a product that hurts kids.

And the response to research seems similar

But the research didn’t matter. To both the media and the politicians, anecdote was evidence. The idea that toughness was the answer had a deep appeal to those who saw drug use as sin and punishment as the way to redemption. And Synanon produced testimonials worthy of a revival meeting. Indeed, it eventually recast itself as the “Church of Synanon.”

The article documents one teen who was falsely assumed to be a drug addict

Bradbury, who was not an addict, was nonetheless held. He later described beatings and continuous verbal assaults, which for him centered on sexual abuse he’d suffered as a young boy. Staffers and other participants called him a “faggot,” told him he’d led his abusers on, and forced him to admit “his part” in the abuse.

And the emphasis on confessing failures, real or imagined, is a significant part of recovery

If these “newcomers” didn’t give convincing enough confessions in group sessions, they would not be allowed to “progress” in the program and return to home and school.

Sadly, the methods at these tough-love camps often end up in injury, abuse, or death. Yet they continue, mostly because the promise of hope they provide blinds those who are responsible for the children to the very real risk of damage.

Even today, at least nine programs in the U.S. and Canada still use tactics, such as host homes and “motivating,” that come directly from Straight. Some are run by former Straight employees, sometimes in former Straight buildings. Among them: SAFE in Orlando; Growing Together in Lake Worth, Florida; Kids Helping Kids in Cincinnati; the Phoenix Institute for Adolescents in Marietta, Georgia; Turnabout/Stillwater Academy in Salt Lake City; Pathway Family Center in Detroit; the Alberta Adolescent Recovery Center in Calgary, Alberta; and Love in Action, a program aimed at “curing” homosexual teenagers, located near Memphis.

This article is helpful in understanding the ideas behind ex-gay camps and how they came by their motivations and methods. Viewing them as another form of tough-love control over non-compliant teenagers helps put into perspective why parents would send their children and how they are viewed while at these camps.

And the parents who send their kids to these camps? For the most part, they are uninformed about the absence of evidence supporting tough love programs and often desperate to save their kids from drugs and delinquency. Until we figure out a better balance between the right of parents to place their kids in whatever programs they choose and the right of kids to be free from inappropriate punishment by agents of their parents or the state, the abuse will continue. The shame of it all is that we know hurting kids doesn’t help them.

Last week the Los Angeles Times presented an article that looked at conservative evangelical churches to see the result that the recent scandals in Colorado have had.

No one has proposed rethinking the theology that homosexuality is a sin. Instead, there’s a growing consensus that the church must do a better job of helping pastors resist all immoral desires, such as a lust for pornography, an addiction to drugs or a lifelong same-sex attraction.

Seminary professors, Christian counselors and veteran clergy say the best way to help pastors fight temptation is to get them talking — even about their most shameful secrets. They don’t want a sordid tell-all from the pulpit each Sunday. But they would like pastors to bare their weaknesses and admit their lapses before a small group of “accountability partners” — friends committed to listen with empathy, then rebuke or advise as needed.

I think it is wise for a pastor to have advisers. Too often the burden of having to be right and having to be strong all the time can become overwhelming and destructive.

But as a method for battling same-sex attraction, I think this plan is seriously flawed. In order for this to be effective, the pastors would have to believe that their confessions of temptations around same-sex attraction would be treated by their “accountability partners” the same as if they were discussing a temptation to exhibit anger or to have lustful thoughts about a young lady.

This seems to me to be highly unrealistic.

And it seems to me to highlight one of the problems that conservative evangelicals have when addressing issues of sexuality. Because these church leaders view themselves as fair and caring people, their anti-gay doctrinal positions require that they believe that homosexuality is not a separate sexual orientation – just a temptation that some heterosexuals have to face. And this fantasy is given cover by “former homosexuals” willing to state such a claim.

Their response to issues of orientation, is to deny that sexual orientation exists and treat same-sex attraction as though it were a temptation to steal or lie.

Conservative Christians respond that everyone has immoral desires of one sort or another. Straight Christians are called upon to resist the temptation to steal or cheat or look at porn, they say, and gay Christians are called upon to resist any longings for same-sex intimacy.

But same-sex attractions are not the same as a temptation to cheat. And surely this is one area in which ex-gays could provide useful guidance to the church. They could explain that issues of attraction run far deeper and are much more integral to a person than a porn habit or an inclination to gossip. Exodus could share that treating SSA as no different than any other “temptation” is a recipe for failure.

Yet when provided with this opportunity to offer realism, the President of Exodus chose instead to endorse the plan.

Alan Chambers, president of the “ex-gay” ministry Exodus International, holds himself up as an example. He says he confides any wayward thoughts to his wife and closest friends, so they can help him avoid situations that might tempt him to homosexual behavior. “Leaders don’t need to be ashamed of the fact that they’re human,” he said.

In the last few weeks, he has shared that advice with church leaders from across the country. Chambers says he hears a common desperation in their voices. They haven’t yet fallen, they tell him. But they need help.

Sadly, it seems to me that though they need a constructive and realistic approach, instead these “strugglers” are receiving a message of more of the same.

In this age of Culture War and extreme partisanship it seems rare to find a politician whose positions are determined by principle rather than party affiliation. The passing of Gerald Ford, 38th President of the United States is a gentle reminder of a time when bi-partisan was a practice rather than a campaign claim.

Ford was by all accounts a kind and gracious man who placed the healing of a nation above his own political power. And though he made decisions that were not at the time popular – including pardoning President Nixon – in hindsight his choices seem appropriate and necessary.

Ford was unique in that he was our only President to have never been elected to a state-wide or national office. A long time Congressman, he was appointed to be Vice-President upon the resignation of Spiro Angew and then became President upon the resignation of Richard Nixon.

During office, the President considered himself “a moderate in domestic affairs, a conservative in fiscal affairs, and a dyed-in-the-wool internationalist in foreign affairs.” In recent years, his political activism has been limited to lending his voice and name to those seeking to return the Republican Party to a welcoming organization that focused on unifying those who share a common fiscal policy rather than waging war on those with diverging “values”.

In March 2002 the former President joined the advisory board of the Republican Unity Coalition, a gay-straight alliance whose goal is “making homosexuality a ‘non-issue’ for the Republican Party” and whose members and friends include senators, congressmen, governors, mayors, and other political operatives and intellectuals.

At a time when the freedoms and equalities of a subset of citizens are being debated with cries of “evil” and “destruction of society”, perhaps we can reflect on the words of a man who was called to serve at a time of great unrest, when inflation, recession, corruption, and the loss of prestige of the Presidency all conspired to leave a country confused, doubtful, frightened and shaken. Perhaps his perspective might have some value in the “great moral issues” debate today.

Asked his position on lesbian and gay families and marriage:
“I think they ought to be treated equally. Period.”

Asked whether gay couples should get the same Social Security, tax, and other federal benefits as married couples:
“I don’t see why they shouldn’t. I think that’s a proper goal.”

— Gerald Ford, former president of the United States, October 29, 2001
in a Detroit News column by Deb Price

UPDATE: The New York Blade has an article going into greater detail on Ford’s pro-gay activism.

In the second episode of Jay Bakker’s serial documentary One Punk Under God, Jay dealt with his growing conviction that gay and lesbian Christians are worthy children of God.

Perhaps what made this episode so startling to me is that unlike many gay-supportive churches, Jay’s approach was entirely dependent upon Scripture. If it wasn’t in The Word then he wasn’t going to preach it. Jay did his research and looked beyond the quoting of one or two verses in Romans to see history, culture, context, and he tried to understand what the author was saying and how that related to the two commandments upon which all the commandments hang.

Also of interest was that not every one in Jay’s church wanted to hear this sermon – Jay did not have the agreement of all of his board of advisors.

It isn’t hard to be courageous when everyone around you is saying, “Amen”. But Bakker faces losing his financial support and his team that is helping keep his ministry going. The next episode reveals the repercussions of his decision to support gay Christians.

We still have not heard exactly why he was dropped as a speaker for the Exodus convention last year. However his sermons from 2005 show a developing attitude about who is welcome in the church, especially one called “Holding the Door Closed” in which he discusses his meeting with a transgender woman. And in June of 2006 Jay preached at Open Door Community Church in Little Rock which further developed his thinking about gay Christians. Shortly thereafter he decided to join his mother, Tammy Faye, as a straight voices standing up for the LGBT community.

Perhaps it was the growing recognition in July 2005 that Jay’s views of Christian inclusion differed sharply from those of Exodus and the ex/anti-gay movement that caused him to be disinvited to the Exodus conference. It is hard to see how Exodus could accept a preacher who said the following in an interview with the New York Blade last week:

Did a specific event or person change your views on homosexuality?

I’ve had a lot of gay and lesbian friends and my mom was always supportive of the gay community. That made me look into it deeper, and my conclusion is that it’s not a sin. The major catalyst was when I was invited to speak at Open Door Church, a gay affirming church with a gay pastor. My heart went out to these Christians who felt disenfranchised by the church. That’s when I decided I couldn’t be silent and needed to take a stand on the issue.

Do you think it is possible to pray the gay away?

I think God can do anything, but that’s highly unlikely because I don’t think being gay is a sin.

I tend to think of ex-gay ministries as appealing primarily to fundamentalist evangelicals. But there are some “mainline” churches that also are conservative and that readily buy into the anti-gay activism that Exodus and NARTH offer.

Two such churches are Truro Church and The Falls Church, two large historic and affluent Episcopal churches in Virginia near the National Capital. The Truro Church supports “healing from homosexuality” and recommends Exodus, Love Won Out, and Exodus’ local affiliate, Regeneration. The Falls Church relies on NARTH as a source for why gay people are not entitled to civil rights.

Truro and The Falls are not ordinary Episcopal churches. They are far more conservative and just this month voted to sever ties with the Episcopal Church and align themselves with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola.

Although there were other areas of dispute building between the conservative and liberal branches of the church, the issue that brought this separation to a head was disagreement over the place of gay people within the church. So it is fair to compare that policy which they found unacceptable, namely the recognition of a gay bishop in New Hampshire, to that which they find far preferable, the beliefs of Peter Akinola.

Akinola is making a name for himself primarily on one issue, his opposition to homosexuality. And as such, he’s taken well documented positions and expressed his opinions without hesitation. In an article yesterday in the Amherst Times, Akinola reveals his sole experience with an openly gay person:

The way he tells the story, the first and only time Archbishop Peter J. Akinola knowingly shook a gay person’s hand, he sprang backward the moment he realized what he had done.

Archbishop Akinola, the conservative leader of Nigeria’s Anglican Church who has emerged at the center of a schism over homosexuality in the global Anglican Communion, re-enacted the scene from behind his desk Tuesday, shaking his head in wonder and horror.

“This man came up to me after a service, in New York I think, and said, ‘Oh, good to see you bishop, this is my partner of many years,’ ” he recalled. “I said, ‘Oh!’ I jumped back.”

Akinola is also an anti-gay political activist in his native Nigeria. In his Message to the Nation, the archbishop endorsed anti-gay legislation that “includes measures so extreme that the State Department warned that they would violate basic human rights.” The AP reports that

Lawmakers in Nigeria are debating a bill that would ban same-sex marriage and any form of association among gays, even sharing a meal at a restaurant.

Other activities prohibited under the proposed law include belonging to gay clubs or reading books, watching films or accessing Internet sites that “promote” homosexuality.

Punishment for viewing Ex-Gay Watch in Nigeria under Akinola’s favored bill would be five years in jail.

Akinola’s attitudes about gay persons go far beyond just his Biblical interpretation or understanding. It’s clear that Akinola views gays with fear and loathing. Perhaps some of this attitude is culturally initiated and perhaps some is based in ignorance or unfamiliarity.

However, it does cause me concern that churches who turn to ex-gay ministries for guidance on issues relating to sexual orientation would sever a relationship with their parent church over the issue of homosexuality and place themselves under the authority of a leader that embodies the very definition of homophobia.

Exodus claims that they seek to challenge those within the church “who respond to homosexuals with ignorance and fear”. It seems that their consistent vocal condemnation and political lobbying may have negated this part of their mission completely.

(thanks to commenter Ken R for providing information about the link to Exodus and NARTH)

To the young people who all too-often desperately stumble upon our website;

Like us, you have no desire to attempt to “change” your sexual orientation. I trust you’re enjoying spending time with your family over the holidays and applaud you for coming out over Thanksgiving and opening up a previously unshared part of yourself with them. I’m so glad to hear it went well.

Merry Christmas, I’m sorry to hear you returned home to find a rather unpleasant pamphlet in your bedroom. I’m sorry to hear people you thought loved you for all that you have made their true feelings known. It pains me to think of these false hopes and expectations being projected upon you and your life. I fear for you, fear you will be physically or financially coerced into whatever that pamphlet in your room is pushing.

The leader of a “gay curing” group recently said ’come out so we can help you’ but to you young reader I say STAY IN. Stay in until you are free to control your own life. Free from the unrealistic expectations of your parents fed to them by anti-gay organizations. Until you are free to develop and live your life as the fully realized and happy gay person you desire to be.

Merry Christmas everyone. I’m back from my cruise to Mexico last week and now I’m at my parents’ place in Ventura for Christmas. I had the unpleasant obligation of attending church this morning where I was again reminded of one of the reasons for the loss of my faith.

Growing up in the church we are told myriad lies about gay people — that they are unhappy, depraved and godless. It’s common knowledge the most effective way to dispel these lies is to actually meet gay people who are content, happy, fulfilled and people of faith.

Despite being a rather moderate California Presbyterian church I attended, it still subscribes to a Christian-supremacist doctrine. Specifically the choir director, Christina Morris, stated the only people in the entire world who are fulfilled and at peace are those who know Jesus. (To clarify, my family no longer goes to the Baptist church I grew up in.)

In college I studied abroad for a quarter in India and a quarter in Thailand. These are countries where I was surrounded by over a billion people who do not know Jesus and I find it ugly and small-minded to claim none of them are fulfilled or at peace.

This post was partially inspired by the Rev. Mel White’s book which I’m currently reading, Religion Gone Bad: The Hidden Dangers of the Christian Right, which isn’t necessarily about Christian-supremacy but discusses its danger.

Here on the Ex-Gay Watch I know I frequently point out logical fallacies in logical (or perhaps better said illogical) arguments, and my peers here do the same thing. My peers and I have noted ex-gay and ex-gay affirming organizations — such as NARTH and Exodus International — often use Statements Of Conversion to make their points, vice referencing statistically sound research or widely recognized subject matter experts.

Backing up a little, a Statement Of Conversion is where a person asserts that he or she used to believe one way, but now has a rejected that previous belief, and now because he or she has personally experienced belief in both sides of a particular argument that he or she is now a topic authority. This is a version of Argument From Authority — where the speaker is claiming to be, or has been asserted to be an expert, and it’s implied that because the person is an expert he or she should be trusted.

Americans For Truth‘s President Peter LaBarbera has recently used a Statement Of Conversion in his recent article Great News: IL Student ‘Trans’-formed by the Christ of Christmas! to argue for donations, and argue “change is possible”.

Long story short, suburban Chicago high school student John identified last year as transgender student Joanna, but now has converted back to John. From Peter LaBarbera’s telling of the story:

Read more…