Ex-Gay Watch

Actually, the Leviticus commentary only applies to those who do not believe that when Christ came, we should not follow the old laws because the New Covenant has come.

Yes, but how does that apply to bird’s nest protocol?

Deuteronomy 22:6-7:

6) If you come across a bird’s nest beside the road, either in a tree or on the ground, and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young. 7) You may take the young, but be sure to let the mother go, so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life.

If OT no longer applies, can I now take the mother with the young?

If OT no longer applies, can I now take the mother with the young?

If you are convicted it no longer applies, of course!

Just like a lot of people believe the OT no longer applies, then they go around spreading lies about the LGBT community without regard to the 10 commandments. They even steal LGBT rights, like now they are attempting to steal marriage back to their own definition.

And just like such people no longer even think of killing non-virgin women. Instead, they absolutely love these women to death for their experience! That is why the heteroSEXual lifestyle likes to flaunt sex scenes in movies so much! Hey, the practice is so fine!

Wow, tonight’s additions have been entertaining indeed! Here I thought I would come here and be disappointed or hurt by what you spewed this time, but even though it was twisted, under-handed, subversive and just plain mean and spiteful, my feelings aren’t hurt at all! I smiled the whole way through. You all really have me figured out, don’t you? For the record, my “experimentation” took place in college. Your research was pretty good, but not flawless. My goodness, the convoluted understanding of the Bible, the accusations of conflict of interest (you can find our books in Deseret Book, incidentally, we opted to self-publish to have final editing rights, but don’t you worry, we have our testimonials and professional support), it’s just one good laugh after another. It’s good to know you consider my story “common”, perhaps my book will be more relevant than I at first expected! But trust me, money couldn’t possibly be a viable motivation for publishing this book–there just isn’t big money in putting out a story like this, especially from a small, family-owned publishing company. And I only suggested a reading of my book so you would get the big picture, rather than the dumbed-down versions you’re spouting here. I don’t actually expect anyone here to read it, except perhaps for nefarious purposes. Yuki, I wasn’t referring to you in the least, for heaven’s sake don’t flatter yourself. Sure, I may have referred to “my” blog, “my” experience, etc., but like it’s been said, I’m the one with the onus to prove something, right? It makes sense to bring up “my” history. I do have one more thing to say, and then I am done here *knock on wood…*, and heck, David, you even prompted it! When you mentioned my possible future with XGW, I couldn’t have asked for a better lead-in. It is this:

So, back in Noe’s “I Do Exist” days, he and his ideas and beliefs were probably not very well-esteemed on this website (and/or others like it) or by its supporters/staff. His very existence as a former homosexual was probably questioned and refuted. Rather like myself, he and his views were probably ridiculed and demonized, treated with disdain and contempt, especially considering his relative youth. His sanity and spiritual convictions were probably questioned and shut down without a second thought. But now that he’s changed his tune, he’s lionized and celebrated with sickening sycophancy. So interesting, Noe, that the same people who probably would have slandered and lynched you back in the day for standing up for what you then believed are now great supporters, grovelling and kissing your feet. Are you satisfied with the legacy you’re leaving now? Does it not bother you that these same people, your current “allies”, once regarded your entire worldview and life experience as not only insignificant, but also fallacious and laughable?

There is no honor among thieves. Sometimes a person’s mind, opinion and loyalty changes as often as the wind blows.

In the utterly impossible event that I go back to my old ways (let’s make this abundantly clear–this Utah closet door has already been opened wide and slammed shut, leaving splinters and shards), there is no chance under God’s heaven that I am going to turn here to be prostituted by these clearly treacherous, validation-desperate pseudo-intellectuals, and used to further spread your gospel of hate and lies. You said it yourself, it’s shameful exploitation, though you claim it’s what you’re against.

Longer than I expected tonight. Have fun pettily tearing this post apart as has been done to each post so far. Heaven knows you will. In fact, I could probably write my own version of what you’re going to say, and be pretty accurate. What started as a simple expression of gratitude has turned into a typical conversation almost identical to many I’ve had in the past.

You will all be in my prayers! There are more of us than any of you would dare to imagine or admit! God loves truth.

Yes, well good luck with all that Andrew

I will address what appears to be an actual valid point in the ramble above, our reporting on Noe from the past. It remains on the record, good or bad. There may be a little of that in there, most mostly from commenters, not the writers. Certainly nothing as melodramatic as your dime-store novel reading of it. But still, I’m sure we have been unfair to some in that regard.

The only comment I can remember making about Noe after seeing “I Do Exist” was that he seemed like a sweet guy, sincere, and that I felt very bad for what he must be going through. I had no idea how true that was until I was able to speak with him later. But you are correct in an odd, probably didn’t realize what you were saying kind of way — we do become jaded by those who become so obsessed with the idea of not being gay that they have to become professional ex-gays to keep up the fight, exploiting where they can.

I wish very much that XGW was not necessary, but these organizations have a very poor record of policing themselves. And without someone to make it clear that one should actually have proof of such statements, a distraught parent might actually believe your mom’s statement that “same-sex porn causes homosexuality” and a whole lot of other whoppers out there.

But look on the bright side, you can use your exchange here as a good boost to your victim/martyr status.

“you can find our books in Deseret Book”

People are welcome to try and do that. If nothing else, you are consistent.

As for Noe, the conversation here has been generally well moderated.

The conversations about “I Do Exist”, however, were not so generous. It was plainly a manipulative load of tripe, dressed up as some sort of academic contribution to issues about sexuality. The presentation of Noe seemed out of kilter (to us), and more a plea on his part to “name it and claim it”; rather than anything convincing about “change”.

If anything, Noe can be seen as having returned to an original message for tolerance; regardless of whatever diversions his life took along the way, and regardless of whatever he currently sees his calling in life to be. Perhaps he should have known better than to publicly advocate under the tutorledge of such a disreputable movement; but we all misjudge the real intentions of others at times.

(Indeed, the person who has ended up with the egg on their face is the person responsible for producing that hogwash in the first place. It’s taken a lot of calls, and we don’t doubt only the upcoming threat of the public statement by Noe, before we finally got even so much as the weasel.)

Drew… the mill grinds slowly, but it grinds very fine. Do what you want with your own life, but stop pretending to be misunderstood or persecuted when people object to the abuse you (and your parents) are spewing. You have a right to your own torments, but people will rightfully defend themselves against the intolerant falsehoods of others.

More the point, we seriously ask you to reconsider whether you should take a public role — with such a weak testimony, surrounded by such poisonous opinion that shall surely haunt you, and with a very obvious inability to deal gracefully with the scrutiny of others.

We fear, alas, this is something you will only come to realise through experience; rather than by commonsense or from wise counsel.

Grantdale,

I’m not so sure any Grahams’ book(s) are at Deseret Book. At least not when you do a search on the DB website and I’m afraid to go inside a DB retail store. Not because I would be immediately vaporized the second I crossed the threshold into the store but rather I’m afraid I might not be able to restrain myself from choking Ms. Sheri Dew if I saw her. (Remember, she’s the one that compared the gay agenda to something akin to a Hitler-esque threat to civilization…lovely isn’t she?…and she’s President of Deseret Book.)

yes cowboy — that’s what we meant : we did a search, and couldn’t find them listed. (the “you are consistent” meant “consistently making stuff up and claiming it to be true, even if it’s easy for people to check otherwise”)

Without going inside a D.B. — I have to admit, the instant vaporisation would bother me too; and nobody wants a cowboy who’s molecules are that energised or that far apart — perhaps a tome or two are indeed “laying around”.

A “holding up the wonky leg of the table in the 2nd meeting room”, or “propping open the door to the alley way when we take deliveries” type of laying around, I mean.

And we doubt you’d choke anyone, in all seriousness. Nope, you’d probably be more likely to somehow trick them into a steer roping contest in a muddy arena… to their vast humiliation and the amusement of the crowd. Family fun for all, and no assault charges.

We’ll stop with the cowboy refs now

For the record, Drew is now an open advocate of a one, Mr. Stephen Boissoin.

Found this

http://deseretbook.com/store/product?sku=4943529

apparently temporarly out of print

Oh yes, wrap your cause in a “defense of the children” and you can get away with all kinds of awful things. Sad to see that even our reasonable “neighbors to the North” have their share of nuts to contend with. What will happen to this globe when we run out of people to demonize?

“Noil” (aka Drew) said:

Found this

http://deseretbook.com/store/product?sku=4943529

apparently temporarly out of print

Gee, thanks Drew, but why hide behind a different name just to give us that? So you will know, we don’t allow posting under multiple identities here. It disrupts the flow of the conversation, and it is intellectually dishonest in such discussions. Please stick to your original nickname if you wish to post again.

Thanks.

Grantdale,

I thought you would advise me not to ever assist any cowboy that is helping hoist a sheep over a fence. (Just visualize for a moment.) But we do need to rein in the sheep/cowboy jokes…PETA might be reading this. (wink wink)

Speaking of being cheeky. Commentor: Noil is really Drew? How quaint. How utterly lame. Trying to foist a sneaky one past us? We, who are pseudo-intellectuals, are easily buffaloed? (taking hayseed out of my mouth)

Why wouldn’t searching for: “Graham” bring a listing for this book on the web page? Does “Out of Print” mean: We’re Not Going To Stock This Book Either. It says nothing about being “temporarly [sic] out of print”.

Moderator Action

This comment contained excepts from emails between the commenters named Drew and Yuki. This is inappropriate and we don’t allow it. In her defense, Yuki was trying to discuss issues which Drew carried from the public discussion to emails aimed at her. To do this, she posted the information thinking others could reference it in the spirit of open debate. Unfortunately we just can’t do that, and the situation here illustrates one of the reasons Drew was asked not to solicit private discussions in the first place.

Moderator Action

See explanation in previous moderated comment from Yuki.

Yuki — in all honesty I wish you hadn’t done that.

As warped as the man is, those were emails back and forth between you two: not posts for here. We also got one, but it’s too silly to even bother replying to let alone showing others (even if we felt inclined).

Not sure what the policy is… but if David does redact your posts don’t take it personally — it’s not because of the issues etc, but because they started as private emails.

At least you know now why he was fishing for an “off-line discussion” with people, rather than openly converse on the blog. They’re sneaks — that’s how they operate

——————–

cowboy, we’d never do that! We have, naturally, hoisted a few sheep over a fence or two in our time. Crutched. Dipped. Eaten. All part of being Australian. And who’s Peter?

grantdale…

I knew both of you would appreciate the sheep thing.

Peter? Oh you mean: PETA …People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. (Maybe you need to click the box: LARGE FONT on your browser options).

In a cursory scan of Drew’s e-mail to Yuki, I’m not sure Drew is 100% heterosexual as he claims. We see Larry Craig and others say they’re not homosexual but yet they’re doing what homosexuals do. Suppression of feelings does not convert you from your natural sexual orientation. Neither does ‘acting’ like a hetero prove anything.

I’m curious about the type of pornography Drew claims to “cause” his homosexuality. Plus, no one forced Drew to purchase pictures of naked men either. The root of the curiosity in gay pornography is what is important to note here. Shutting off access to gay pornography will not make you hetero. You have to also deal with walking past a hunky guy and accept what your thoughts are about. You have to recognize there is a spark, no matter how much you try to suppress it, of sexual lust for seeing an attractive guy. Then, you can’t sequester yourself from all worldly examples of male sexuality to continue your process to heterosexuality? You can’t always close your eyes when you see a billboard or an underwear ad. And what about wet-dreams? What are Drew’s real fantasies about? Dreams are a telling sign about your sexuality. Nocturnal erections are subconscious validation of your sexual desires…and orientation.

I doubt Drew, as he says, is certifiable hetero. I suspect Drew is as gay as I am. I know my years of self-induced celibacy were a result of peer pressure and of a grand scheme at manipulation by my Mormon family and friends.

Nocturnal e******* are subconscious validation of your sexual desires…and orientation.

Actually, I was under the impression that much of the time they were caused simply by the way blood flows through the body as it positions itself during sleep, and not necessarily a form of arousal. (And I censored myself, btw, to prevent search engines and spammers from picking up this site for the wrong reasons.) In addition, oftentimes “erotic” dreams represent something other than attraction or desire – I read that a dream of an erotic occurrence with a person you loathe represents not a repressed sexual desire for that person, but of an expression of the fact that you are, in life, engrossed in personal situations you would never want to be in – for example, dealing with a stressful family member.

But I’m no expert.

Maybe it’s one of those differences between men and women. And I’m no expert either…but…my dreams were pleasant ones about persons I were attracted to…(when I could remember what the dreams were about).

Curiously, you can type erotic but erection gets panned?

Who knows this could be a discussion about some architectural-green building techniques and Brad Pitt and both might need to use the word: er****** in the discussion.

100% heterosexual.

I have never heard an actual heterosexual say this about themselves. I have heard people say, “Sorry, I’m not into guys,” or “Nope, I play for the other team,” etc.

There is only one person who really stands out in my mind for having claimed to be 100% heterosexual, and that was Alan Chambers on Terry Gross’ NPR program, “Fresh Air.” Maybe it’s just an ex-gay thing.

In my opinion, I don’t think that any person that has been posting on this site is homosexual in any degree. You are all suppressing your heterosexual desires by surrounding yourself with others that are just as bent on trying to convince themselves. Every desire that you have is something you are conjuring up in your mind only to try to push out the heterosexual thoughts. Any dreams that you have are simply your mind carrying on the thoughts that you force into there throughout the day. Let me reiterate that again. None of you are homosexual.

Jared wrote:

You are all suppressing your heterosexual desires by surrounding yourself with others that are just as bent…

So we aren’t homosexual, but we are “bent.” Hmm. Someone might want to look up some of the alternative meanings for the word “bent.”

Doesn’t that sound a lot like what you all are doing to Drew?

Doesn’t that sound exactly like what you all have been saying to Drew?

Another thing. From the way some of this debate has played out, I’ve gathered that most of us here are Christians. As Christians, I assume that we all believe that the Bible is the word of God. So, as such, I’m curious how everybody feels about the following scriptures:

Romans 1:24-32

A lot of the talk has been about faith and how we need to focus a lot on faith, salvation, etc. But does that mean that we can overlook other things that God has said?

Y’all’s thoughts.

One day there is a chicken called “straight”. A born chicken. One day when he was a young adult, he began to fantasize drifting across the lakes with the ducks. He watch some “documentaries” on it. So he made his move and dives into the lake. He felt good for that fleeting moment. Then his legs began to struggle paddling across the lake. It was then he realised it is just not for him. He climbed out exhausted, and with deep pain and the realisation that the lake life is just not for him. Then all the chickens rejoice for him for he had left the lake. He felt good, he felt pleased. So he began to go around spreading the news to every chicken community that the lake lifestyle is horrible, damaging and life threatening. Little did he know that he is disrespecting a duck who was around there.

That duck is called “gay”. He is a born duck. No one believes he is born that way because on the chickenville the land is huge but the lake is small. But he had lived his entire life as a duck, among the small community of ducks nearby. Some of the ducks had ventured into chickenville with the same disasterous consequences of trying to live like a chicken. But they realise they will never be a chicken and returned to the lake. These ducks were scorned by the majority chicken community for not trying hard enough to be a chicken. But the duck saw what happened and realised, ducks will be ducks, chickens will be chickens.

The moral of the story? A duck called gay, even by the pressure of the majority of chickens, can never be called a chicken, and must accept himself in that full affirmation. A chicken called straight may try to venture into the lake lifestyle for curiousity, but can never be a duck. Straights and gays are but two sexual orientations. Respectfully, all must accept what they are born as, and can never attempt to cross over. The evidence is all there. The day ducks and chickens were born, they were born distinctive in characters and will face life as who they are. There may be confusion along the way, but the true self always will mature.

I’m off to stuff (or “force”) my head with things to dream about tonight…otherwise I might not dream and I’ll be a plain, ordinary hetero. There’s no fun in that!

In case anyone had not guessed, we’ve just confirmed that “Jared” above is also our friend Drew. Drew (aka Jared, aka Noil), we told you this nonsense was not allowed here and why. Apparently you are not interested or able to have a direct discussion and have no problem ignoring the basic rules that everyone else follows.

You and all your alter-egos have been banned from commenting in the future. Please respect that and go on your way.

Hey Yuki, when is a chicken not a chicken? When it’s a duck with a glove on its head.

Lol, just something weird I say

Please, do you people really think that Drew is the only one opposed to the homosexual lifestyle? I can assure you that I am not Drew.

And thank you for adding to my point. That is post #3 without any refutation to my post.

Just to clarify for anyone reading this thread:

In response to Jared (aka Drew, aka Noil):

I’ve gathered that most of us here are Christians.

That would be a bad assumption. As most are aware, there is a heavy Christian involvement in all things ex-gay for reasons that can be pondered in other threads. Since that is the case, you will find more people of that faith, some heavily disallusioned by their experience with ex-gay organizations such as Exodus, and others detached from their faith entirely. But most of it does involved Christians. However, there are people of various faiths who read and comment here, including those with no faith at all — they are all quite welcome to participate.

The only thing we ask is that those faiths be respected and the conversation remain civil, we are not here to decide who’s belief is right or wrong, though sometimes there are some mini-debates amongst those of the same faith or division of that faith — most of those are harmless but can become boring to others, so we try to limit them.

So there you go, Drew managed to contribute something positive after all in that I got to clarify his inaccurate assumption and explain an important issue to new readers.

No daughter of mine would ever date Drew/Noil/Jared. Not if I could help it. I know the kind of sneakiness Drew is doing here. I would also suspect he is not being totally truthful with his prospective dates. He needs to tell them he once perused gay pornography and got off on it.

No sweet spirit…no special Sister in his Mormon world would ever get involved with Drew if they knew his past. So, I understand his need to say he is completely heterosexual. He would be dateless if he told them the truth.

**Side note: I have no daughters. But if I did…

It’s funny, because “Jared” commented on this thread earlier while “Drew” was simultaneously commenting:

It’s an interesting thing, really. I’ve recently been following websites of this sort, observing the conversation between the pro-heterosexuals and the pro-homosexuals. There has been a pretty interesting correlation. It seems that as soon as a pro-hetero says anything on the subject (generally non-offensive and without malicious intent) the pro-homos viciously turn on him/her, often with personal attacks. For people that always want to focus on love and acceptance, homosexuals are hardly practicing what they preach. Thank you for reaffirming this surprising observation.

People seemed to (rightfully) recognize this attempt at trolling, so he was ignored. But Drew was engaged. And Drew, your I.P. address will give you away, as well as your location that the I.P. address is linked to.

It’s an interesting thing, really.

Can you just visualize Drew at a romantic dinner with his California girlfriend. (He has to date girls from out-of-State because they aren’t aware of his past.)

I’d put on my football-referee uniform, stand at their table with hands on my waist, and blow my whistle (tweet!) and yell: OFFSIDES! Illegal motion in the backfield! 100-yard penalty for dishonesty.

(For grantdale: You have to understand American football. I’m sure it’s similar to Australian football except your referees are cuter cuz they wear shorts.)

Yuki,

My dad used to like calling the duck an “odd bird,” because it was too much for two, but not enough for three.

Not that this has anything to do with your post, but I couldn’t resist.

Ok Cowboy, I think we all had our catty moments in this thread, but let’s not get too personal about the sarcasm. Let’s also remember that this was a fairly serious topic before the right turn at Utah

I think perhaps we (myself included) should let this one wind down now. New and interesting posts to come…

Okay. I agree. And I truly wish the best for Drew. Honest.

David R: You and all your alter-egos

Yeah… think you nailed it down flat this time!

and as the threads winding up…

cowboy : For grantdale: You have to understand American football.

Oh, we understand. We just think… what a bunch of big girls blouses with all that padding and helmets and stuff. All that stopping and starting doesn’t make any sense (what? are they puffed out or something?) but we do love the part of the game when the moms run onto the field and kiss away all the hurties.

Wait a minute, grantdale – aren’t you the guys who play baseball with those white jumpsuits, caged helmets, and huge bulky kneepads?? And maybe the Phillies (my home team) would hit more homeruns if they had such wide bats..

Late, and off topic, I know, but grantdale, my partner is from Singapore – he delights in making fun of American football players – with all the pads and the frequent rest breaks…

But then he actually thinks soccer is exciting, so what does he know???

Drew (jarred, noil, etc.)

I wish you happiness in finding the person you were meant to partner with.

However, you will have to forgive my skepticism about having left “this part of my life” behind you for a decade. I’ve found that few people take well to celibacy (in the Christian world it’s a calling) and have noted that those who do not believe in premarital sex very seldom wait until their late 20′s to marry.

Your story is your own, but surely you understand that credibility is going to be questioned when presenting a story that is so very difficult to believe. When claiming that your cow speaks English, you can’t be upset that folks demand a videotape. So too will they question, “I’m fully heterosexual and have been celibate for a decade but that has nothing to do with my attractions”.

Further difficulties arise when your family’s website contains information that is, on the face of it, ludicrous. Preposterous. And, frankly, so utterly stupid that it deserves mockery. (this isn’t said to offend you, but to emphasize the extent to which it should be obvious that its false).

For example:

Homosexual sex (sodomy), causes chronic illnesses and life-threatening disease (HIV/AIDS), shortening life by an average of 20 years.

This is nuttery. HIV is a virus which can be transmitted through sex (heterosexual and homosexual) as well as by other blood contact. It isn’t caused by “sodomy”.

Q: Doesn’t heterosexual sex carry the same physical risks as homosexual sex?
A: No, none, if there is abstinence before marriage, and fidelity and healthy, normal sexual intercourse in marriage.

At this point, even the most ignorant of backwoods rubes knows that if there is abstinence before a same-sex relationship and fidelity within it – regardless of whether there is “normal” sexual intercourse – has no more risk of transmitting disease than heterosexuals. Do you really think that viruses are magically created by sex acts?

Until you come with a testimony that can be believed on some level, you cannot expect folks to take your word.

You all may recall that the father of Drew/Daniel/Noil/Jarred caused a bit of a stink when he tried to make a presentation to the American Fork High School PTA.

I stumbled upon this entry through a Google search. I have been through a year long ex-gay program that was very traumatic for me. I felt that much of the criticism that Noe has leveled at the ex-gay movement is very legitimate, as well as much of the criticisms leveled against some parts of the ex-gay movement. I believe that is very hard to change one’s sexual orientation, and indeed wonder how important that really is, if one believes that God does not approve of them fulfilling their sexual desires. I fall in that camp–though I do desire men sexually, I can’t live that way, because for me, my convictions won’t allow me to. I don’t speak for anyone else, but I do know this: that through the grace of God, it is possible to deny one’s desires.

What prompted this comment is something that Noe wrote in his first paragraph:

By making consistently “biblical” choices in the expression of their sexuality, the ex-gay person can experience a level of “freedom from homosexuality” albeit paid for in their own blood, sweat and tears.

There is no doubt that the path that I have tread for the past 30 years has been one that has been difficult. “Blood, sweat and tears” is no real exaggeration, as Noe clearly says. But where I differ from Noe, and I suspect many who have come out of the ex-gay movement is that I don’t necessarily believe that “blood, sweat and tears” are things that we should avoid in this life, nor is their absence signs that we are in God’s will, nor is their presence a witness that somehow we are living a life that God has not willed. We are told many times that we will suffer in this world–why should blood, sweat and tears over our sexuality surprise us? We have never received promises from God that we will not suffer–quite the contrary. Our Savior sweat blood and shed tears–should we expect anything different when he has called us to take up our cross daily? I find that in the battle against my desires I have been given a gift by which I can come closest to following Christ, and I take comfort in the words of Paul in Romans 8:18, “I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us.”

I think in this world we have forgotten who we are, and where we belong, and for what purpose we were created. Our fulfillment and happiness on this earth is not our ultimate aim and goal in life, and if indeed we desire to find our happiness in the transitory joys of the earth, whether that be in possessions or in the arms of another, then we have fallen far short of the potential blessing that God has in store for us. C.S. Lewis says something profound that resonates deeply with me: “If you think of this world as a place intended simply for our happiness, you find it quite intolerable: think of it as a place of training and correction and it’s not so bad.”

For me, I have come to view my very desire for men, and the conviction that I cannot fulfill those desires as a gift from God that He is using to shape me into His image. It is part of my training and correction and I view it as my cross to bear, which He calls us to do, and in so doing, I hope and pray that He will give me the strength to place my desires on the altar, in the hopes that my life can become a living sacrifice. I do not believe that living in a homosexual union is approved by God, regardless of how much the erudite writings of pro-gay theologians may have suggested that the interpretation of Scripture has been incorrect–the mental gymnastics required to believe in what they wrote does injury to my own rational mind. For me then, I have had to ask the question of why I feel this way. For me, it is a severe mercy that I am drawn to other men and attracted to them and it is in the very act of denying those desires that I come closest to my true self: a child of the most High God, called to become like Christ by denying myself and submitting obediently to Him, regardless of what my inclinations may be.

I think we forget the nobility of our inheritance as being children of God. We far too easily settle for happiness on this earth instead of seeking the peace that comes from obedience to God.

If feelings of sexual attraction are not a choice but acting on them is, the split between feelings and actions can leave a person feeling segmented, even disconnected from their true self. Ex-gay groups affirm this disconnect in their members, perhaps unwittingly convincing them heterosexuality is within their reach. If groomed properly, this disconnect can become so pronounced that in some cases the “reformed” homosexual will in fact be so far removed from their sexual attractions that to say they are “no longer gay” seems perfectly within reason.

I think this is a strange belief. Aren’t all actions based on sexual attraction a choice, regardless of whom one is attracted to? Why would denying one’s sexual desires be traumatic or psychologically damaging for anyone? We do this on a daily basis.

Contrary to Noe’s assertion that our sexuality is at the center of our identity and human experience, I have come to the conviction that our sexual fulfillment is not a worthy goal in and of itself. Why should it be? Sex is not any guarantor of happiness, nor is a relationship with anyone–except with God, our Creator and Heavenly Father. I have strong sexual desires, but God has called all men and women to take all of their desires and offer them up to Him. In God’s plan, our sexuality, and all the rest of who we are orbits around our soul, united with Christ. We are called to bring everything to Him. We cheapen who we are if we believe that our sexuality is at the center of our identity. The center of our identity is that we are made in the image of God. Our cry and creed to God must be that of our Savior: not my will, but thine be done. If there is one message of the Bible that comes through loud and clear, it is this one: deny yourself, particularly in the area of sexuality. Why should we be surprised at the possibility that some of us have sexual desires that can never be fulfilled under the will of God?

I view it as a high calling, and a noble calling, and a beautiful sacrifice that can be given to God. I too believe in prayer, but my prayer is very different: I pray that all Christian men and women who feel homosexual desires would come before Christ at the Cross and fall on bended knees and say to Him, “I unite my sorrow and pain with your suffering on the Cross–use it for the furtherance of your Kingdom on earth.” It is there, at the very foot of the Cross, and offering up all of my sexuality and my desires to Christ that I find who I truly am.

I believe we fall short of God’s beautiful plan for our lives when we do not see our desires, which I believe we cannot fulfill, as the very vehicle through which God pours out his grace into our lives. As we deny those desires each and every day, God’s grace is poured out into the world as we become living sacrifices for his glory.

That’s the message I wish the ex-gay community would talk about.

But where I differ from Noe, and I suspect many who have come out of the ex-gay movement is that I don’t necessarily believe that “blood, sweat and tears” are things that we should avoid in this life, nor is their absence signs that we are in God’s will, nor is their presence a witness that somehow we are living a life that God has not willed.

I am in full agreement with the statement above and I do not shy away from the sacrifice that comes with personal conviction. The assumption here is that as a former ex-gay I lose this very unique association with Christ; one that closely links the self-denial in ex-gay therapies with the sufferings of Christ on the cross. This is a false assumption and one that sets the “sufferings” of ex-gay people above those of other people groups. Though the quality of the sacrifice it takes for ex-gay people to deny their sexuality is considerable, this does not relegate people who accept their homosexuality to a lower status of union with God. This belief is popularly held by ex-gay groups, either overtly or covertly, and (IMO) is one of their greatest weaknesses. The way people get connected with ex-gay groups often has to do with the influence of shame from parents, friends or self. This shame withholds acceptance, love, and inclusion from the individual based on the notion they are rejected by God. This is all founded on the idea that there is no possible way for God to accept a gay or lesbian person “as is”, rather acceptance must be worked for and bought in terms of human sacrifice. Ex-gay groups provide a vehicle for the individual who adopts this logic, a place to prove to themselves and (in their minds) to God that they are worthy of acceptance. My personal opinion is that the acceptance that comes from God is not by human works, rather by faith in Christ and that alone. Now, to assume that because of this belief I am not privy to human suffering on the level that helps bring me closer to identifying with Christ is a mistake. Like any other believer, my faith is challenged on a daily basis. I have learned and continue to learn lessons that will likely last a lifetime– humility, charity, chastity, self-sacrifice, and love to name a few. What is liberating for me now that I am outside the ex-gay movement is that for once I am not in control of my own “spiritual education” and for once, I am able to trust God to teach me the lessons I need to learn in his own time.

Dan,

I read your comment above with respect, appreciation, and compassion.

Respect because you are faithfully working in a direction that you believe God is calling you and are willing to set aside pleasures, temptations, and momentary satisfaction to achieve what you are seeking.

Appreciation because you did not come here with a snarky and dismissive attitude (though I may have found within your words some evidence of self-righteous condemnation, judgment, and certainty).

And compassion because, well, its not something new to hear. This testimony has been given, time and again, especially to one in your place on your journey.

This reminds me of a comic strip from my youth. If I recall correctly, it went like this:

For some unknown reason Lil Abner and his fellow Dogpatch denizens had been compelled to take the place of statues in a museum. Lil Abner was posing as Atlas, with the world on his shoulders.

Abner was not troubled by the weight at any moment. He was strong enough to bear it. But what he came to find intolerable was the recognition that this was to be his future, that he would stand in one place with this weight on his back for the rest of his life.

So, Dan, I wish you peace and joy and hope that you find the life you have crafted for yourself to be all that you want it to be. But I fear that the day will come when you look to the continuing future with dread and question your decision. And you may well wonder at the wisdom of having stood so long in one place bearing an unnecessary burden.

So, Dan, I wish you peace and joy and hope that you find the life you have crafted for yourself to be all that you want it to be. But I fear that the day will come when you look to the continuing future with dread and question your decision. And you may well wonder at the wisdom of having stood so long in one place bearing an unnecessary burden.

I appreciate the comments, and the discussion. I don’t have many people with whom I can discuss these things with, and indeed, because of my rather negative experience with the year long Living Waters program, I find that I agree with much of the criticisms of the ex-gay movement that I have read here and so I would rather discuss them here than on an Exodus related forum.

I offer my take as one voice in a million, to contribute to the conversation. I don’t want to ever come across with self-righteous condemnation or with judgment to anyone! God forbid! As to the certainty, I have reached a point of certainty in this regard, for myself, so if I write with conviction I suppose that’s to be expected.

For me, when I think of your last paragraph, I don’t view this as an unnecessary burden. I see it actually as an invitation, and that’s what’s exciting to me! In my comments, I write from the standpoint of someone who has actually become excited by the prospect of embracing this part of my life, in a way to shoulder this burden, not out of some self-righteous stance, but as a way to love others.

I have come to cherish one passage of Paul, Colossians 1:24, “Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.”

This is an interesting phrase: “fill up…what is still lacking in regards to Christ’s afflictions.” I’ve come to view any suffering that presents itself in our lives as something we can offer up on behalf of those we love. It certainly isn’t a case where Christ’s suffering is somehow incomplete, but rather that He allows us to unite our own suffering with His, for the redemption of the world. I view this as a tremendous gift from God.

For me, it’s an invitation, rooted in love for others, and in any way we deny ourselves, I believe we can offer this up on behalf of those we love, to be used by God for the furtherance of his kingdom.

The writing of Thomas Merton has meant a lot to me, particularly this passage:

Suffering, therefore, must make sense to us not as a vague universal necessity, but as something demanded by our own personal destiny. When I see my trials not as the collision of my life with a blind machine called fate, but as the sacramental gift of Christ’s love, given to me by God the Father along with my identity and my very name, then I can consecrate them and myself with them to God. For then I realize that my suffering is not my own. It is the Passion of Christ, stretching out its tendrils into my life in order to bear rich clusters of grapes, making my soul dizzy with the wine of Christ’s love, and pouring that wine as strong as fire upon the whole world.

After many, many years of struggling with this, I have come to see my personal suffering as the sacramental gift of Christ’s love. I see it as an invitation to join with Him. I’ve begun to see just a bit of the joy that Paul seemed to say could be found in suffering, and I guess I find that to be the good news of the Gospel. So for me, questioning the wisdom of shouldering the burden is something I don’t think I’ll ever question, because I’ve found it to be filled with too much joy. And that is something that is so exciting, that I want to tell the world.

“My yoke is easy and my burden is light” has only begun to make sense to me by seeing it through the lens of Christ’s love for us. It wasn’t that his yoke wasn’t difficult–He died on a Cross!–it was His love for us that made it easy and light, and as painful as it is to suffer anything, whether it be an illness, or denying one’s sexual desires, it becomes something I think we can embrace when we view it as something that can be poured out upon the world, out of love.

Thanks for the comments, Noe. I found your original post to be well thought out and very insightful, and the same with your response to my post. (Sorry…I should have combined these two comments!)

I suspect that we hold much more in common than we disagree with. I don’t like much about the ex-gay movement, even though I’d call myself that. (Or maybe I’m a Side B Christian–I just learned that term here on XGW recently). I don’t really like any labels like that, honestly, since I’m just Dan, in my mind. I just happen to like guys (and yes, even some women) and have thoughts about what that means for me as a Christian.

The way people get connected with ex-gay groups often has to do with the influence of shame from parents, friends or self. This shame withholds acceptance, love, and inclusion from the individual based on the notion they are rejected by God. This is all founded on the idea that there is no possible way for God to accept a gay or lesbian person “as is”, rather acceptance must be worked for and bought in terms of human sacrifice.

I guess my story’s a little different. I went to my first conference mainly because I wanted to try and see how I could be obedient to what I felt God was calling me to do. I also wanted to finally be able to talk to some other people who had dealt with this in their life as well, to finally be able to not “be alone.” I fortunately never had any shame brought to bear by my parents, only love and compassion. I certainly never felt rejected by God because I thought guys were hot–though I never believed he approved of me acting on that (even though I did).

For me, I believe that God accepts everyone “as is,” and then immediately begins working to change them. Particularly in the areas that are really important: pride, envy, greed, arrogance, self-righteousness and the whole list of stuff that Christ got so exercised about with the Pharisees. For me, I’ve come to realize that the “change” I think God desires for me is moving to a place of not contemplating having a life with another man, and so avoiding all that goes along with that. (I have found women more and more attractive to me, but I don’t say that as some ex-gay groupie might to prove that change is possible. It just sort of happened, and it ebbs and flows with me, and more often than not, it’s the guys that get me going.)

When Ex-gay groups ever communicate the message that the people in their programs need to earn God’s acceptance, or the acceptance of family members, or a church, through demonstrating that they’re willing to do the “hard work” necessary through their own sacrifice, then they do injury to the people they’re ostensibly trying to help. I am in complete agreement with you about that!

When I talk about blood, sweat and tears, I’m not talking about working hard to earn acceptance, or approval from God, or anyone. I’m talking about taking each day as it comes, and for the choice that I’ve made, to try and avoid the temptation to be with another man. I’m not doing that to prove myself to anyone–I’m just trying my darnedest to do what I think God is calling me, personally, to do. And so your phrase, finding “‘freedom from homosexuality’ albeit paid for in their own blood, sweat and tears,” this is the blood, sweat and tears that I’m talking about, not proving oneself to anyone else. It’s that nose-to-the-grindstone difficulty of following one’s conscience.

And so I’ve had to seek out my own answers to why the blood, sweat and tears have come into my life, as I elaborated on a bit in my comments to Timothy above.

I guess in conclusion I have come to view the sacrifices of anyone as something that can be united to Christ’s suffering. I don’t suggest or believe that “the “sufferings” of ex-gay people” are “above those of other people groups.” I’m simply thinking of this in terms of my own life’s journey, and to offer my thoughts as one voice in the conversation. In the context of Thomas Merton’s comments, where he says, “When I see my trials…as the sacramental gift of Christ’s love, given to me by God the Father along with my identity and my very name, then I can consecrate them and myself with them to God,” I realize the greatest struggle I will ever encounter is the one against my natural inclinations to be with a man. If I view this very struggle as a gift from God, along with my identity and my very name, then to seek out ways to fulfill those desires, rather than to do battle with them, I miss out on the power of uniting this struggle with His own, in ways that could never happen if I lived happily ever with another man. That is not to say or suggest that I wouldn’t suffer in other ways, but rather that I would cheat myself from experiencing all that God had in store for me by embracing what for me is a most difficult burden.

This is what I’ve come to believe about my own life and situation, for what it’s worth.

“My yoke is easy and my burden is light” has only begun to make sense to me by seeing it through the lens of Christ’s love for us.

Sadly, I find Exodus and other ex-gay organizations seem to have no limit of new yokes with which to burden those who simply want to work out with God what His desire is for their lives. The day they are just as happy for someone who comes to accept their sexual orientation and live comfortably with all that might entail, that will be the first step in the right direction for them.

We’ve affirmed the reverse many, many times as Timothy has again above, yet I’ve never once heard them do the same. The one exception to date would be Wendy Gritter and New Direction, a woman with more wisdom and grace than anyone I have dealt with from Exodus. They would be wise to place her in a position of leadership with great flexibility — she could do a lot of good for them.

Feel free to participate here anytime, Dan. It is not necessary that we all agree on everything, only that we are civil and honest in the discussion. I think you will find a great deal of wisdom and candor from those who comment and write here.