Ex-Gay Watch

I am not sure how this thread became about Wayne Besen, but he has caught political ex-gays lying time and again, and has called them liars. I don’t really disagree with him on that.

The other issue that Marcus delves into is the issue of “the choice” to pursue reparative therapy, and that is spot on to this subject. Throckmorton’s SIT guidelines seem designed to present reparative or reorientation therapy as one choice among many for a person who is unhappy with their same sex attractions. The language of ex-gays who are opposing the APA panel looking into reparative therapy is focused on respecting “the choice” of the patient to pursue change.

It seems that a concerted effort is being made to change the focus of the discussion of reparative therapy by trying to hide it by burying it within the larger framework of SIT therapy. I don’t think that the APA will be that gullible, and I don’t think we should either.

As to the issue of choice, people have a right to live their lives however they choose, but I think that it is appropriate to hold mental health professionals to a higher standard. There is no convincing evidence that reparative/reorientation therapy works and psychologists should not be enticing their patients into this course of therapy with promises of success.

I disagree with Peterson that it’s possible to choose your religion. Or, at least that it’s possible to choose whether you actually believe it or not. I don’t think you can force yourself to believe or disbelieve that God is real. Belief is largely involuntary.

I mean of course you can choose to call yourself Christian and go through all the motions without actually believing. So is Peterson suggesting that sincere belief is not necessary to be Christian?

Hugo Schwyzer has a recent post about how “faith is not a choice”

Jasmine, many thanks for pointing out Hugo’s article. I greatly appreciate his perspectives on faith and gender.

I have to disagree highly about faith not being a choice. Yes, unreasoned faith may not be a choice, but then again unreasoned faith is not good (blind faith). Even Christ suggested that there was choice in faith when he asked the rich man to give up his items (or said that one follows him and leaves behind family). Faith is deep, but it is also problematic. What if faith betrays everything that reason presents? People can do very extreme things because of faith (Jamestown Massacre?). There are parts of Protestantism that believe faith in some exists prior to birth–but that would suggest a cruel God since some are saved before birth. As an agnostic, the idea of faith not being a choice is really faulty. Yes, we grow up in families and inherit their faith, but in most cases there is a point where one has to accept that faith and engage in ritual that is purely choice (communion, baptism, etc.). Unlike food, housing, sexuality, etc., faith is not necessary to survival. It may be secondary and help aid survival, but ultimately people choose faith if it is reasoned.

My sister, who is now passed away, was upset that I was not Christian. She did not have a problem with me being gay, just not a Christian. She said, “I don’t know how you can’t believe in God because don’t you want to go to heaven.” For her, reason was useless–choice was made on reward. People can also change faith and religion as if they change clothes.

Jasmine:

I don’t think you can force yourself to believe or disbelieve that God is real. Belief is largely involuntary.

I agree with Aaron that belief, actually, is voluntary. So is faith. And faith compasses of voluntarily believing in something that is not solidly proven. So there is a choice there. If the faith is a fixation on something that is proven false, it is delusion. It all starts with a choice.

Christians believe in an intangible Christ, though all have not seen or heard from Him. Christians have to bear the consequences if Christ do not exist. Or end up in hell because of the wrong choice of God. Still Christians choose to believe in the Christ. That is faith.

We know our sexual orientation and gender identity is inborn and generic because reality, sciences and our own beings in existence proves it. We are who we are. That is belief.

The fundies lied so many times they have faith in their own lies. To the extent the words of the Bible are selected, distorted, or misinterpreted either intentionally or unintentionally to justify prejudice, intolerance and bigotry. They choose to discriminate truth. That is delusion.

Dave Bennett wrote an article sometime back in reference to the late theologian Paul Tillich:

http://dmbennett.wordpress.com/2006/11/19/wrapping-up-tillich-the-difference-between-faith-and-belief/

PW,

Yeah, I think both of us are guilty of not trying to put ourselves in the other’s shoes. For what it’s worth, I have met some opposition, with both of my Christian friends and non-Christian friends. Not much, mind you, but enough that I’ve braced myself for whatever might come in the future. My family is rather liberal and I have no idea how they’ll react to my choice to pursue celibacy. I know my brother (who I’ve come out to) thinks I should just go ahead, have a boyfriend, etc. It is one of those weird situations when a kid is more conservative than his family, but I’m dealing with it.

I’m not trying to be straight, so my Christian friends still don’t like when I call myself “gay” (gasp!), and my non-Christian friends don’t really understand the concept of being celibate. It has put me in a variety of odd situations, but I must admit that it has not been so bad. I certainly don’t want to take away from anyone else’s experiences.

Regan,

Like I said, I’m not really trying to be heterosexual. I was merely saying that the only way I’ll have a girlfriend is if I’m attracted to her first. I’m not going to partner up with the hope that I’ll get attracted. That is just plain wrong.

I’m not “waiting” or looking forward to heterosexual desires, though. I don’t think they are guaranteed or, for that matter, necessary. I completely agree that the church has a long way to go in realizing that not everybody is heterosexual and that being straight is, frankly, not all that.

Also, I certainly hope that I can show people what it’s like to be gay. I mean, I am gay. I don’t hide that fact and I don’t pretend I’m something I’m not. It has cost me, whether you want to believe it or not. Even though I’m celibate, my mannerisms, my voice, the very fact that I refer to myself as a homosexual has cost me. So has the fact that I’m a Christian. I’ve almost lost friends on both sides, and I’ll tell you all about it if you ask. So don’t say that I’m not out there, and that I can’t represent just a facet of what being gay, or being Christian, means.

Pam,

Thanks, girl. I could use some of your grace, sometimes. You always know how to put things in a more Christ-like tone. I really appreciate you (along with everyone here, I think). Have a blessed day.

This is an extremely belated reply to Warren Throckmorton’s question to me in comment 15 above: “NickC — Please produce my descriptions of how I would counsel individuals that lead you to the conclusion you cited.”

That was in response to my statement, in comment 14: “I don’t think that Warren, by his own description of how he might counsel individual cases, would do much to help a conflicted individual realize that ‘If you DO decide to embrace your homosexual orientation, you can build a healthy, responsible, happy life.’”

I didn’t have a chance to answer Warren at the time, and then was on vacation. Just catching up now. If anyone is still following, I feel Warren does deserve the courtesy of an answer.

I was thinking specifically of a direct question I posed to Warren on his own blog. I asked how he could advise a young person who was still conflicted about his homosexual orientation vs religious beliefs. Would Warren, without steering the client in one direction, affirm to him that if he DID decide to embrace his sexual orientation, that choice could lead to a healthy, productive, happy life? In other words, would Warren provide equal affirmation for either direction?

Warren’s answer was only that he would steer the client to the best available resources to help with his decision. He did not say, and I have not seen a clear statement from him, that he would affirm a decision to embrace a homosexual identity equally with a choice to follow traditional religious precepts.

Perhaps I, as a layman, do not appreciate the constraints upon a therapist to remain neutral while a client reaches his own decision. Perhaps Warren feels he cannot offer any affirmation of either choice, lest he unduly influence his client.

But I feel strongly that in the real-life situation of most people struggling with their sexual identity vs their religious upbringing or beliefs, the one voice missing is a trusted, neutral counselor who can dispel the fear and prejudice surrounding these choices. And that means being able to tell the client that–despite what his worried parents and his minister and his church youth leader may tell him–choosing to live as gay can indeed be a healthy decision rather than a straight path to promiscuity, drug abuse, and eventual damnation.

Not the ONLY healthy decision, mind! But A healthy decision.

Perhaps I am misjudging Warren and his sexual identity therapy, but I am not sure he would give his clients that assurance–clearly and without qualification.