Ex-Gay Watch

Focus on the Family recently claimed gay activists (NGLTF and PFLAG) have “pressured” the APA to re-examine it’s position on allowing members to practice gay conversion or reparative therapy. Given Focus’ recent history of distorting science and reality to fit their worldview, I contacted the NGLTF, PFLAG, and the APA myself and spoke respectivly with Jason Cianciotto, Ron Schlittler, and Clinton Anderson. What I learned was that in an informal meeting Schlittler (PFLAG) expressed concerns to Anderson (APA) over: (in Schlittler’s words)

“aggressive promotion of “reparative therapy” by right wing groups.”

Given that the APA’s position statement on reparative therapy is 8-years old Anderson issued a formal memo in September of 2005 to NGLTF and PFLAG seeking formal opinions from both organizations. To be clear, NGLTF never even gave their opinion to the APA until asked for it. I hardly consider that “pressure.”

Focus did not report the primary reason for the formation of the investigative task-force, which is because: (in Cianciotto’s words)

[since 1997 a] “growing body of new research has been published on conversion therapy and a number of other medical and mental health professional associations have released new statements and policies on the issue.”

All three sources I spoke with, the APA, NGLTF, and PFLAG indicated this was the primary reason for the formation of a task-force. Focus neglected to report this.

Focus on the Family took in 143 million dollars in revenue in 2005.

Focus has contributed nothing to the body of research on conversion therapy but rather spent vast sums of money erecting billboards asking people to “question homosexuality.” The only evidence of “successful” conversion therapy Focus has offered is a troupe of career professional ex-gays, and and even Focus would have to agree that for the APA to base their professional scientific standards and methods on that would be akin to malpractice.

It’s no wonder Focus doesn’t want to report the primary reason the APA is reevaluating its position. They could have contacted these same people for the facts but apparently did not. Either this is incredibly sloppy journalism or they were trying to spin a story that wasn’t there.

Anderson (APA) also reported the formation of a task-force has been authorized and nominations will be accepted in March.

Exodus sent out a press release encouraging people to “tune-in” to the Montel Williams show today to see guest Alan Chambers.  This may confuse those who tune in because today’s show is actually about “Murder and Mystery with Sylvia Browne.”

The show with Alan is being taped today with the broadcast probably a week or so later.  You can always see Montel’s schedule for the final word.

Earlier this month Alan was on Anderson Cooper 360 and made some very interesting statements about “change” in three weeks, gay Christians, and his own reasons for leaving homosexuality. Rest assured I’ve done my homework and found Alan and Exodus’ track record on these things don’t match up. Most dramatic is Melissa Fryrear’s claim she’s met exgays who changed instantaneously. Oh yes… we have audio of her saying that at Love Won Out Phoenix. Just watch the video.

Video on YouTube / Google Video

Transcript after the jump.

Read more…

On Wednesday, in their infinite wisdom, the state legislature of Utah has passed a law intended to shut down clubs that teach tolerance of other students, regardless of sexual orientation.  On Thursday it was reversed on a technicality and didn’t have the votes to pass Thursday’s revote.

The bill would have required all sorts of additional hoops for non-curricular clubs to jump through for starting up including requirements that parents sign permission slips. While the authors of the bills claim that they want to protect children, absolutely no one believes that this is intended to do anything but shut down gay-straight alliances.

The key provision of the legislation bans any clubs that — quote — -”involve human sexuality” or threaten the “moral well-being” of students.

The authors of the bill claim it bill stand up to the Federal Equal Access Act because it applies to all clubs equally. Pretending for a moment that we actually believe this claim, we wonder exactly which clubs a clever school board could ban had the bill made it to law.

I would recommend the Fellowship of Christian Atheletes because they promote the notion that God favors MY team which may well threaten the moral well-being of students.

And I’d ban the homecoming committee for involving human sexuality.

Those who claim to speak for “American Values” would often have us believe that a core American value is discrimination against gay people. Increasingly, however, this “value” is becoming an anachronism.

Another evidence that gay people are beginning to be recognized and valued as a part of the American family is a new poll from the folks at Gallup.

Between now and the 2008 political conventions, there will be discussion about the qualifications of presidential candidates — their education, age, religion, race, and so on. If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be homosexual, would you vote for that person?

Of those polled, 55% said yes and 43% said no.

Interestingly, even among conservatives, a gay candidate could receive 36% of the vote. Liberals found the idea of a gay presidential candidate less concerning than a septuagenarian, a Mormon, or a thrice married heterosexual. Everyone preferred a gay President to an atheist President.

There was no mention as to whether an ex-gay presidential candidate would fare well.

The San Francisco Chronical has an article about a protest of ex-gay ministry Desert Stream and their seminar in the heart of San Francisco.

An evangelical Christian minister from Missouri, who came to a San Francisco church to teach gays and lesbians how to become straight, was greeted Saturday by a protest led by a gay theology student who said the preacher’s conversion therapy was so psychologically damaging that he twice attempted suicide when he tried it.

The Bay Area Reporter also covered the seminarians and ex-ex-gays that came to protest the message of brokenness.

Maria Caruana and Todd Ferrell of San Francisco’s Freedom in Christ Evangelical Church came out to join the protesters, wearing purple “Christian + Gay = OK” T-shirts. Ferrell was there, he explained, “To let people know that there are people out there that have found freedom and have a great relationship with God. I don’t think that he intended my life to be in a quandary about change for 40 years. What happened is that I found freedom just by accepting myself and accepting the gift that God gave me as a gay man and suddenly peace and joy and all of the things that I didn’t have before that I was fighting, finally came.”

Additionally, there is video here of the effort.

Here’s a story about Cheryl and Keri.

Once upon a time they met and fell in love and decided to get married, start a family, and spend the rest of their lives together.

So Cheryl and Keri went to Vermont and had a civil union. And they used artificial insemination to have a daughter. Cheryl was the birth mother. And all was good.

Then, as too often happens in such stories, things went sour. Cheryl found out that Keri had been unfaithful and their relationship ended with remorse and recrimination. Keri moved out.

But though they were no longer a couple, Keri continued to see her daughter. Even after Cheryl moved from Utah to Texas, Keri would drive to see her child. This did not make Cheryl happy. So she stopped Keri’s access. And became ex-gay. And used the resources of the anti-gay movement to punish Keri and drive her away from her child.

The Supreme Court of Utah just decided in favor of Cheryl.

This sickens me not only because of the immorality of placing anti-gay bigotry ahead of all of the intentions of the couple, but also because ex-gay conversion was used to gain support from anti-gay activists and because the anti-gay religious community is rejoicing in one woman’s pain.

For me this raises a number of questions.

First, is there any moral reasoning that can justify separating Keri and her daughter? Perhaps one could argue that the law was what it was and that this is a sad conclusion. But morally?

Here’s what the Alliance Defense Fund had to say:

“Protecting the well-being of a small child trumps the desire of a legal stranger to usurp the care and protection of that child’s mom,” said the group’s Joe Infranco. “The Utah Supreme Court ruled correctly in affirming Cheryl Barlow’s right as a natural parent and putting an end to visitation with a woman who has no legitimate legal relationship to the child.”

And I’ve yet to see anyone from the ex-gay community condemn this action. Which makes me wonder whether they favor this cruel decision.

Second, what else could Keri have done to protect her family? Utah refused to recognize the steps she did take and did not allow her to take others solely because she was part of a same-sex couple.

And yet the ex-gay movement continues to claim that gay couples don’t need protections afforded by civil unions or marriage and is actively involved in efforts to prohibit same-sex adoptions.

I know that many ex-gay advocates read our comments here. And many will tell us that they are not vindictive or hateful or in favor of discriminatory or punitive treatment towards gay people. Some of you claim that you wish to treat others the way that you want to be treated.

My challenge to you ex-gay ministers is this:

Is there anyone involved in the ex-gay movement that thinks this is a morally unjustifiable result?

Is there anyone in the ex-gay movement brave enough to say, “I don’t want my children taken away from me so I find it unacceptable that Keri’s daughter was taken from her”?

Is there anyone willing to admit that using the ex-gay movement as a tool to be spiteful and vindictive is inappropriate?

Is there anyone willing to say that same-sex couples should be empowered to make decisions about their family and take protections – either through adoptions or civil unions or partnerships – that cannot be vetoed at the whim of an ex-partner?

In short, is there anyone involved in the ex-gay movement that is willing to take a stand for fairness, humanity, decency and basic morality?

Peterson Toscano and Lance Carroll — both survivors of Exodus’ flagship live-in boot camp, called Love In Action — were on Montel yesterday (02/20/07) each briefly discussing their experiences with the ex-gay movement.

By Timothy Kincaid

One aspect of war is dealing with enemies, those who seek to do you harm. And we all know that in war, enemies are to be destroyed without compassion or hesitation before they do the same to you. Millennia of warfare have shown that the best way to keep your troops willing to fight is to dehumanize your enemy. Don’t let your troops sympathize or see theirselves in the enemy or they may not be so ready to slaughter him.

Sadly, these rules of engagement also apply to culture wars.

We can readily see this tactic of dehumanization in the language adopted by ex-gay ministries and their anti-gay political allies. They portray gay people as unhappy, unhealthy sex fiends incapable of love who operate under an agenda to destroy the family and Christianity. It is easy to deny the depraved the same rights and priveleges you share.

Unfortunately pro-gay participants in this debate too often employ these tactics as well. We may stray from criticism of the message (and there is plenty to criticize) and begin to criticize the messenger. Such an instance occurred recently when Wayne Besen discussed the comments of Chad Thompson.

Not only does Chad dress like a slob and look like he needs to take a bath – he also speaks out of both sides of his hypocritical mouth.

This is, unfortunately, not the first time that Wayne had gotten a bit too personal about Chad. He has also said,

In his world, God judges a man by his pecs, not his prayers. If you are too old, fat or not cool enough, it appears you can’t get in his Bel Ami Bible Club.

and

You know what irritates me about Chad? On the front page of his website he dresses like he is a teenager at a rave. But if you go deeper into his website one can view crowsfeet on his face. He clearly is no longer a teenager. His fake rave boi act is just a cheap and tawdry way to recruit confused young men into his troubling ministry.

I do not agree with Chad Thompson’s theology or his ministry. To me, his idea of Loving Homosexuals as Jesus Would includes social/cultural activism that is contrary to the teachings of Jesus. And it seems to me that this “loving” consists of little more than putting a pretty face on hateful anti-gay attitudes and behaviors.

Nonetheless, this does not warrant attacks on Chad’s friends, person, or appearance.

Chad’s sense of style may be more grungy than mine, but comments about his clothing choices are not appropriate. And perhaps I’m reaching the age where such comment rankle, but jibes about crowsfeet are just tacky.

Perhaps it seems that I’m picking on Wayne here. That’s not my intent. Wayne has probably been no more guilty of this than I have been at times.

But in this ongoing discussion about sexuality, freedom, equality, religion, values, and how they all impact the efforts some people make to change their orientation, I believe we are best served when we cease warring and begin communicating. And that is better accomplished when we challenge the message, and not the messenger.

Julie Marie Nemecek, formerly known as John Nemecek, has recently filed a suit against Spring Arbor University (SAU). The University is firing the transgender professor/Baptist minisiter effective June 1st, choosing not to tolerate Nemecek’s transformation from John to Julie Marie:

Pastor Tom Ramundo is superintendent for the southern Michigan conference of the Free Methodist Church, a conservative evangelical denomination with which the university is affiliated. He says Nemecek has been a cause célèbre for homosexual activist groups like PFLAG — Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.

“It seems very carefully orchestrated,” says Ramundo in reference to the discrimination claim; “the way they’re going about it, the legal connections, the public relations move. I feel this professor has been very carefully coached on how to respond, on how to ‘come out,’ on how to build a case.”

According to Ramundo, Nemecek had been ignoring clear guidelines the school had laid out for him. “I know that university really well, and I know its leadership,” he says. “I am sure they have endeavored to treat him in a redemptive way.” The Free Methodist superintendent describes the situation as “just one of those issues where there’s that tension between love and purity, and the school’s just finally having to take a strong biblical stand.”

Can one be a transgender Christian? Rev. Ramundo apparently doesn’t think so. Neither does Spring Arbor University President Gayle Beebe, who has stated that Nemecek’s transition is “not in keeping with Biblical principles” and “inconsistent with the Christian faith.”

Read more…