Exodus VP Randy Thomas Almost Gets It
In Exodus VP Randy Thomas’ latest attempt to define the happenstance of being attracted to the same sex with a single cultural “worldview,” he almost figures it out. He almost realizes that what pushes us to become LGBTQ rather than just L, G, B, T, and Q is our daily task of facing discrimination and opposition - including opposition from people like him who are members of groups like Exodus International. In his blog post about the hypothetical “Gay Legacy,” Randy ponders the discrimination and hardships faced today by gay senior citizens and recounts his own encounter with a young gay activist who had been picketing a Love Won Out conference:
He angrily went on to tell me how oppressed he and his boyfriend were (in Massachusetts), and how he had been beat up during his school years for being “different.” He had tried everything (at eighteen) to get rid of his feelings and now he was happy and embraced both his being “gay” and Christianity. He shared about how his coming to peace with his sexuality inspired him to organize the gsa (gay straight alliance) in his school.
I thought it remarkable that, aside from his wanting to get rid of his homosexuality in his early teens, he was repeating the exact same messaging I was saying before he was even born.
Well, Randy, it’s not difficult to deduce that discrimination against LGBTQ persons, despite remarkable growth of acceptance in my generation, is still rampant. This young man is not repeating “messaging.” He is describing his struggle to live honestly, without fear. There is nothing “remarkable” about seeing person after person recall the same kind of struggles with their family, church, and community.
When Randy decided to become a Christian, he rejected his homosexuality completely in favor of a path of sexual celibacy and self-deception, joining a group that actively seeks to limit LGBTQ equal rights and keep the bullying of LGBTQ youth socially acceptable. This young man reached a much more honest conclusion than Randy did, by deciding to be sexually true to himself and channeling his struggle for acceptance into positive outreach to other gay youth.
What many XGW readers may themselves marvel at is Randy’s admission here:
Public policy battles will always be flash-points of non-compromise but I am personally encouraged that today’s broader culture is much safer for those with same sex attractions than the reality of what some of our Senior citizens went through. It’s not perfect and I am not dismissing that true hatred (on both sides) flares up. Even so, it is a far different reality for that 18 year old as compared to the Seniors mentioned in the article.
Does this provide evidence of an ex-gay acceptance of the reality of substantial LGBTQ existence? In my personal opinion, it is a way for the ex-gay camp to spin a losing cultural battle into an avenue of evangelizing their propaganda. Just like ex-gay proponents are quickly restyling their message in reaction to undeniable proof that homosexuality is not caused by alterable nurturing factors such as an “overbearing mother,” a more visible LGBTQ community coming out at a much younger age means a bigger more vulnerable target for Exodus and their ilk. Fortunately, we are growing up knowing better.
Filed under: Exgay Activists, Exodus, Weblogs
For what it’s worth, I believe gays are on the brink of winning their “culture war.” It’s only a matter of time before they will have won the rights they are seeking. Society, for better or worse, is moving in that direction. When that happens, I wonder what the response will be to people like Randy and me. Will we be the lepers then?
“When that happens, I wonder what the response will be to people like Randy and me. Will we be the lepers then?”
Only if you fight to make yourself as such, and insist that content or happy gay people need to be “fixed.”
When it doesn’t matter anymore, when young people, middle aged people, old people are not forced to hide in the closet while their family, friends, preachers, teachers tell them how wrong they are, there will be no threat by people who change their sexuality.
Right now as it stands with a large number of people thinking gay=broken, people who change their sexuality are used as weapons and tools. When these people then go out and recruit other confused and hurting people, saying their hurt and confusion is caused by “the gay” while ignoring the constant hammering they get from others, they are seen with distrust and even disrespect.
When it is no longer painful to just be gay, then then the idea that “professional” ex-gays are preying on others will fade. You will not be seen as causing harm in your attempts to “fix” people who are not broken, because people will realize that gays don’t need to be “fixed”. You will be treated differently, by both sides, you will not be seen as predators who sow suffering or great champions of the cause, instead your efforts will be seen as more genuine. The stigma that you are sowing suffering just by being an outspoken x-gay will fade, of course the idea that you are strong hero will also fade, instead you will be judged on your works and how you live your life. Do good works, or lead a good life and you will be seen as a person offering an avenue to people who have a genuine conflict.
1. I have never insisted that happy or content gay people need to be “fixed.” I have been having some lovely conversations with some of those very people recently, and they know this about me. I can’t speak for others you are stereotyping me along with. If I know of anyone who purports to be an “ex-gay” who is “recruiting” or “sowing sorrow” or forcing anyone to change, I will out such people or organizations at TheFormers. Send your reports to me via the Web site. I am not being facetious. You are making the leap in logic that I am insisting on change because I have changed. Wrong. It isn’t helpful for people to keep beating that drum. Read the FAQs at the site.
2. You are, at least, saying that change is possible. Thank you.
3. I realize both well-meaning and devious people will attempt to use me as a weapon for hate or to forward their agenda. I can’t control or even know everything that goes on in the public domain. I can only attempt to make myself known and be true to who I am. People will be able then to judge for themselves what is inconsistent with my character and reject it as bogus. And if you’re not sure, ask me.
4. It will always be painful for someone somewhere to be gay. Those are the people who, as you say, will be genuinely conflicted and desire help in changing. My two main missions are to bring the right kind of help to those people and to effect change within the Church so that “truth in love” no longer is viewed as a joke.
I reiterate: Show me the “professional ex-gays” who are “preying on others.” I need proof and not just a knee-jerk response. You would expect the same from me. I want to know who, what, when and where. I know what went on in the past. What is happening now?
What does that even mean?? What kind of “change” is possible, Debbie?
I have a few random comments to make.
1) Emily wrote: “undeniable proof that homosexuality is not caused by alterable nurturing factors such as an “overbearing mother”
Taken out of context, I know. Even if true–and it is not true either by data or logic– it is not an ‘alterable nurturing factor’ for two reasons. first, by the time a child discovers he is gay– for most, around puberty– by that time, it is way too late. The child has been already ‘nurtured’. Second, we do not provide training to parents, or require that parents know anything at all about parenting– or even how babies are made.
Debbie Thurman wrote: “When that happens, I wonder what the response will be to people like Randy and me. Will we be the lepers then?”
I love the analogy. I wish you truly understood it. I would gladly be there on the day when you realize what it is like to be treated like a leper by people who are happy to tell you how much they love you– right before they slip in the knife. A host of other good Christians are all happy to tell me how much they love me, and then follow it up with comments like ‘cancer on society’ and the whole vicious panoply of anti-gay, homophobic, lying rants. They will tell me how much they love me right before they tell me how much they hate my child-molesting, disease spreading, country-destroying, religion-despising, marriage-compromising, military demoralizing ways. Sorry, if that’s love, I prefer hatred. At least it doesn’t assume I’m so stupid that I can’t tell the difference.
I live for the day when the Debbies and the Jerrys of the world no longer have any credibility at all, whether they have reverend in front of their names or not. When you are pointed out by the general populace as some one to avoid, someone who tars whole groups of people with the same infamous brush; those people are bad, those people are dangerous, those people are not entitled to equality before the law, THOSE PEOPLE ARE A THREAT TO EVERYTHING YOU HOLD DEAR. Those people are a threat to your children. We do that now with and racial bigots. Maybe we can do it someday with religious bigots as well.
Like a good Christian, I love you but hate your sins– But I don’t hate you, despite your belief. Like a good Christian I hate your sins — your overweening pride, your willful ignorance, your belief that because you think something is true, it must be true, and therefore justifies whatever you do or say, because you are speaking for G and all that is good– just like all of the other people who murder, oppress, hate, judge and on and on and on.
I hate your sin–what you and falwell have done to people whom you know nothing about and who have done you no harm– other than to offend you by their very existence. But that existence allows people like you and randy to earn a living– at the expense of others. Charming. sort of like the Phelps clan– but better dressed and with more media savvy.
You would rather bend and twist scripture, which you believe is the word of G, to fit your very narrow religious and political agenda, than to admit that the seven or so extremely ambiguous passages allegedly condemning gay people are no where near as clear as the 250 or so passages governing hetero behavior. You would rather pretend that the story of Sodom is a clear condemnation of all homosexuality, thereby allowing you to conflate the relationship of two people who love and support each other throughout their lives with the threatened gang rape of two strangers, than admit that there just might be a difference between them. After all, they’re both wrong, so they must be the same.
so yes, let us look forward to your leper-hood. When the bigots and haters of the world are treated like bigots and haters– whether justified by religious belief or admitted for what they are– what a glorious day that will be.
I thought I was quite clear, if the “gay culture war” is won, your thought not mine, you will be judged on your works and how you live your life, not your ex-gayness, this will happen because your ex-gayness will no longer be perceived as weapon, by both sides.
Let me use an example. I have a stylist friend, she specializes in hair straightening, this is a service most commonly utilized in the black community. Her mother did the same exact thing when she was a young girl. Her mother was seen as a traitor and a pariah to her people. This was because blacks felt forced to straighten their hair to get promotions and be better accepted. The idea that this was “necessary” was sickening to them, it implied that nappy hair was broken and had to be fixed, people who provided this service or regularly used it reinforced the idea that it was expected. Today, her daughter is well received and loved by the community for providing a valuable service.
This story offers a greater parallel then you may imagine, many people do not realize that hair straightening can and often does cause harm to the person getting it done, especially when the person doing it is not skilled, yet thousands of people feel compelled to do it every day and many of them go to well meaning armatures.
By the way, it wasn’t gay people that declared a culture war. It was good ol straight boy Pat buchanan.
As always, straight people behave badly and then blame US!
Ben: “… what you and falwell have done to people whom you know nothing about and who have done you no harm– other than to offend you by their very existence.”
I am not nor have I ever been offended by your existence. Wrong, brother. Just what have I done and to whom have I done it? Do you know me? Doesn’t look like it. Your anger borders on the pathological. But I do understand where it comes from. All I can say is forgive those who don’t know what they are doing and let God take care of the rest. They will get what’s coming to them.
In my view, you are free to be as gay as you want to be. Whether or not you will ever have peace with yourself, I cannot say. If I am to be the “leper” one day, so be it. There will be a purpose to it, I have no doubt.
Debbie, I don’t think gay people will care or treat you poorly. Sure, there are some gay people, especially if they just came out, who may oppose your viewpoint, but most of us don’t care at all about your belief. It is private, and you are intitled to it. For example, I know lots of people who think that sex before marriage is wrong, but you rarely see alternate groups opposing that viewpoint.
I have no problem with people who believe gayness is a sin. I have a problem when it goes from private belief to public situations where people’s lives are hurt or endangered. I have a student who came to me that he is gay and struggling. I did not say that he needed to accept his homosexuality. He is conflicted with his religion, but I did tell him it would be difficult. His choice is his choice, and I respect that. No, you would not be lepers as long as you don’t try to continue to hurt us.
A few more thoughts. I’m in the mood today.
DT wrote: I have never insisted that happy or content gay people need to be “fixed.”
Insisted? Probably not. Thought it was a good idea? Probably. Earn your living from it? Only you know for sure. Did Jerry make a lot of money get a lot political power from it? Absolutely. Money and power– two very traditional sources of moral corruption. We have evidence in his 9/11 comments. Among many others. Not to mention the many rewards of self-righteousness (over-identifying with G). And Jerry was clearly going back for eighth helpings at the Self righteous Self-Serving buffet.
The problem with ex-gay pseudo-psychology is that it can never actually be pinned down. What does change mean? As Jones and Yarmouth put it, it can be very complicated and ambiguous– and they are on your side. What does fixed mean? It’s the only therapy known to modern medicine where, when it fails–and it almost always does– the fault lies with the patient and not the doctor.
I’ve only known one of these ex-gay people personally, and his self-conflict was difficult, painful to be around, but ultimately, became boring. It was clear that the anguish was where he chose to be. He neither became straight nor stopped being gay.
Of course, there were two obstacles.
1) There was nothing that was actually subject to change in his being gay, nor was there any particularly compelling reason (in the real world, not the ex-gay and fundamentalist worlds) for him to make the attempt. Nor was it actually possible by prayer or ex-gay methodology or theory. It’s sort of like treating a sore throat by getting a colonoscopy.
2) The ultimate problem was not his sexuality, but his self image and his self esteem. More accurately put– his self-hatred. His inability to move out of the place of not-straight-and-not-gay-but-still-very-unhappy was in fact rooted THERE. He enjoyed poor health, as they used to say. He was so used to hating himself and thought that he deserved everything bad that happened to him– including being gay. Why move out of the drama when there was so much good theatre going on?
Positive self-esteem is the basis of good mental health. Low self-esteem is the basis of poor mental health. And that is what ex-gay ministries prey on– self hatred. Hating oneself is betraying oneself. If you do not love yourself, can you love anyone else? Can anyone else love you? Not if you are worthy of hate. “You must be carefully taught…to hate all the people your relatives hate”– even if it is you yourself.
My question to my wannabe-ex-gay friend was: Do you think you’ll actually stop hating yourself if you become heterosexual?
Basically, I said this to him. Your self-hatred is the problem, not your sexuality. Maybe there is actually nothing wrong with you, so you can’t actually CHOOSE to not have anything wrong with you– just like you can’t CHOOSE to have three eyes. Maybe the something wrong with you is actually the only thing that is right with you, but you’ve been very carefully taught to reject the best of yourself, and choose the worst of yourself.
From everything that I have seen of ex-gay people writing here and elsewhere–
Professional ex-gays lives are very much like alcoholics how haven’t had a drink in 30 years but still go to meetings six nights a week. The problem is not the alcohol. And their lives are still ABOUT alcohol. Guess what a professional ex-gay’s life is still about?
You are correct. I apologize for lumping you in with Falwell. I don’t really know about you much beyond what I have read here. My experience, however, with ex-gay proponents is not good. so I was wrong. You were not an appropriate target. But falwell–absolutely.
I will disagree that my anger is pathological. I am very angry– about this– but mostly I am a pretty relaxed happy guy, as all who know me will attest.
This where my anger comes from. When I say ‘you’, am am referring to a very generic you, not you personally. You just means the people in the world who think there is something wrong with being gay and that it needs to be fixed, or changed, or halted dead in its tracks.
I’m sick to death that the course of my life, and my happiness, and those of millions of people just like me, can be subject to your beliefs OR your prejudices, whichever they actually happen to be. Only you know. I am equally sick that gay people are imprisoned, attacked, murdered, executed, used as political fodder, vilified, condemned, persecuted, jailed, slandered, libeled, and accused of all sort of things that are simply NOT TRUE because someone doesn’t approve, or believes their God does not approve.
I am furious that people just like your beloved Jerry earn their livings by making my life, and the lives of people like me as difficult and unpleasant as they possibly can. Including thinking that they are doing a GOOD thing by doing so, by attacking me, by ‘disappearing’ my marriage.
I am very fortunate, on the other hand, that most of it doesn’t touch me personally, except as it touches my compassion. Someone tried to get me fired once, but he was an idiot. Another guy made the mistake of trying to mug faggoty-but-presses-250 lbs- me. I hope his face grew back.
but I’m not Matthew Shepherd. I haven’t been kicked out of the military. I haven’t been imprisoned. I didn’t spend 18 years in ex-gay hell like Peterson Toscano. I didn’t try suicide, or drugs, or alcohol as a response to the self hatred I was taught.
So again, I apologize.
Debbie, one quick observation. If even a portion of what you have claimed about yourself is true, then you and Randy Thomas are very different people. I would not so quickly put you and him in the same sentence on purpose. I honestly think Exodus would have a better chance of making some positive changes if Alan could find the strength to drop Randy and give him the advice he needs — to go as far away from being a career ex-gay as he can, go to school and find a different means of making a living. I have rarely seen anyone so out of place in a ministry.
As to Falwell, I realize there is no shortage of grief and hatred concerning this man. He was challenged with bigotry throughout his life it seems, with racial bigotry in the 50s and 60s and gay bigotry after that. There is no doubt he made really bad comments and followed them with some really bad actions. He hurt a lot of people just by that. However, in those final years, if Mel White is to be taken at his word (and I think he can be), Falwell was confronting and taking responsibility for some of those things he had said and done. This does not cure the ills, but it’s better than if he had not done so at all.
Since the man has passed, perhaps we can avoid continuing to beat him up as though he was a current force and leave him to deal with his maker. At the same time, it would probably be good if Debbie didn’t “sing his praises” to an audience that still feels the pain of publicly being blamed for 9/11, among other things. It seems to me the person who has taken up that mantle today is Rep. Sally Kern.
Just a couple of thoughts, carry on.
LGBTQ–Um, when does this alphabet soup end? What about the intersexed and two-spirited people?
David, your point is well taken. No more Falwell mentions from me. I do have to remind you that it was Dave (unless he was directed to do it) who dug up the Falwell comments in the original item that has led to all this discussion. And Andrew continued it. That would have been better left alone, too.
I do understand there is some real angst directed toward Randy Thomas here. I don’t know him, so I’d better also stay out of that.
Ben, I certainly accept your apology. I’ve eaten a lot of humble pie in my time, some of it today.
You reminded me that I did not address your earlier remarks about “professional ex-gays” profiting monetarily from whatever it is they are perceived to do. First, I know that “Christian Right” fund raising has been associated for a long time with profiting from gay hate- and fear-mongering. There is no doubt some truth to that. You do need to know, however, that I have a ministry, plain and simple. I PAY to have it in existence, and frankly, I am broke. It is not a nonprofit, fund-raising entity or under the umbrella of one. I can’t speak for anyone else.
There is also some truth in your AA and ex-gay therapy junkie analysis. There are lots of therapy junkies out there across the spectrum. I have worked with them for years. That includes the self-hating, the suicidal, the angry and the just plain confused.
Emily,
I don’t know. I can’t read Randy’s mind, but I can say that there are things I find encouraging as an exgay about the increased acceptance and visibility of LGB people. And it ain’t those.
1. Um, I care about people and don’t like to see them getting hurt, physically or otherwise. Or living in fear or shame. This is by far the most important. And it’s pretty simple.
2. A more accepting environment for gays, in some ways, is a more accepting environment for exgays. I feel that PFOX and others try to set it up as zero-sum game, that any advance for gay folk is a loss for us. That doesn’t seem quite right to me.
Increased acceptance means that I have an easier time talking to my [conservative] Christian friends and acquaintances about this stuff. I’ve noticed a big difference in these ten years on an exgay path. In the beginning, when I talked with Christians, I was often the first openly gay person they had ever spoken with. There was a lot of confusion and awkwardness to work through. Now I find that more and more have at least some familiarity with homosexuality and gay people, and a lot of the sillier misconceptions have been rooted out already. Also, knowing reasonably happy gay people actually helps evangelicals appreciate our sacrifice and struggle, what we are giving up. In the early days, it was sometimes hard to get sympathetic support from them, because they tended to dismiss the sense of grief and loss I was feeling.
Also, because Christians are more used to gay people being out now, they don’t see us talking about our sexuality as some huge imposition, like we’re dropping a bomb on them, or sharing a hideous secret. They are coming to accept that it is normal and healthy and sometimes even necessary for people (including gays and exgays) to be open about their sexuality with others in their lives.
Of course, it’s not all sunshine and roses. The increased acceptance of LGB folk did make things harder in dealing with those outside of evangelical circles, like my parents. My parents gave me a hard time for being gay as a kid, but as the culture changed, they changed their minds as well and got all PFLAG on me. By that time I had already converted to evangelical Christian faith and started dabbling in exgay stuff, so they then started giving me a hard time for being exgay. Some people you just can’t please!
They often berated me for my convictions and celibacy (at the time), telling me that I had fallen in with a cult, that I was going to end up miserable and alone, that they just wanted me to find a nice girl and settle down and be happy. For a season I just cut them out of my life because I was struggling hard and they were just making me feel worse. They gave me a hard time about Mr. DM when we started dating, although I think seeing us together eventually helped them to mellow out, and they happily gave me away to him in marriage, and my mom tells me now that she admires and envies our relationship. (And yes, I know people admired and envied Gene Robinson’s relationship with his then-wife back in the day, so I’m not adducing that as proof of anything beyond my parents’ acceptance.)
Still, overall, I think the shift in attitudes has been beneficial for us. Friends and acquaintances who aren’t religiously conservative might be a little weirded out and may try to fix you at first, but the ones who really love you will always accept you no matter what. And even with more casual acquaintances, I find that if I try to explain things sensitively and carefully, I can still get a decent amount of respect, at least on a personal level.
There is prejudice and contempt (deserved or not) out there, and I have been really sensitive to that at times. Sometimes gay-affirming people who don’t know about you say things in your presence that make you cringe inside. When I converted, for the first few years I usually tried to pass as a regular dyke who just didn’t happen to be seeing anyone at the moment. But in that situation I wasn’t even giving those people a chance to reject me, so I don’t know what would have happened if I had been more open. On the occasions when I was able to overcome my personal shame over being exgay (c’mon DM, aren’t you too smart for that fundamentalist crap? what century are you living in? what kind of self-loathing loser/traitor are you? don’t you have any dignity?) enough to let people in, they usually responded well, although sometimes with concern. Which is understandable. Perhaps someday we will be the “lepers,” but for now, I have personally found anti-exgay attitudes and actions to be relatively mild and rare compared to the homophobic stuff I experienced growing up. I don’t think we have the short end of the stick quite yet.
3. Increased acceptance and openness allows for more informed decisions for exgays. Knowing that others have made different choices provides us with genuine alternatives. I am grateful that I had many opportunities to discuss matters with gay Christians and to thoughtfully consider various forms of gay-affirming theology before taking up the path I eventually chose. I think it helped me to make my own decisions from a place of greater strength and integrity, to build on a more solid foundation.
4. Increased acceptance of LGB people makes it possible for our decisions and journeys to be clearer in focus, more genuine, more authentic. As the years go by, we have less and less of a “mercenary” or worldly incentive to do this. This is sort of related to Kith’s first comment. In earlier generations, the social penalty for being gay was so unbelievably high, and the pressures to not be gay so severe, that I think it must have been very hard if not impossible to sort out what one was doing to try to please God and follow Him from what one was doing to appease family and society or just stay alive.
But now, as it becomes less and less socially costly to be gay, and more socially costly to pursue an exgay/celibate path, I believe it purifies our motives, encouraging us to search our hearts about what we are doing, what we are believing, and why. (Nothing encourages self-examination quite like being told by your friends and family that you have completely lost your mind.)
It helps an exgay path look more like Christian discipleship and less like a cowardly cop-out.
ack…sorry this is so long–DM.
Going back to Debbie Thurman’s question: “When that happens (social acceptance of gay people), I wonder what the response will be to people like Randy and me. Will we be the lepers then?”
Sorry to jump all over Ms. Thurman, but I get so sick and tired of this whining from the ex-gay side about how they are persecuted and belittled.
I lived as ex-gay for thirty years.
Never once in those thirty years did I have to worry that I might lose my job because I was living as a heterosexual.
Never once did I worry that if I held my wife’s hand in public, someone would give me a dirty look or worse.
Never once did I have to hesitate to kiss my wife goodbye when we parted ways on the sidewalk.
Never once did I have to be concerned that I might get harrassed or beaten up when leaving a restaurant or bar, because someone thought I was straight.
I was even able to serve as a Cub Scout leader for my sons, because I was “no longer” gay.
The only discrimination ex-gays face is that a lot of us think they would be happier if they accepted themselves rather than pursuing a fruitless search for an unnecessary “change.” If that makes you feel like a leper, well, I’d suggest you grow a little thicker skin.
The fact is that someone who wants to live as heterosexual does not face any stigma or legal barriers in this society. That’s not at all true for those of us who simply want to live openly as who we are.
Debbie: Unfortunately I do not have the time tonight to comment as I’d like about this, but I did want to leave a link to something I’d ask you to read:
http://averagegayjoe.blogspot.com/2008/05/what-gays-lesbians-hear-from-many.html
I posted this link to my comments so you can understand my own thoughts on this subject, but the real heart of this is the link to a post by Michael Spencer. This man is also a Christian and while we may not agree on everything he frankly “gets it”. You are going to find a certain level of anger and hostility from many because of what you represent. No, I not talking about your faith in Christ, many of us share this, but instead the ex-gay movement combined with blatantly anti-gay religious groups. It would illogical and unreasonable to expect us not to be wary.
Ok enough for now and I’ll try to comment more tomorrow. God bless.
Thanks, DM. I guess I’m not in the lion’s den alone today. Although I have to say there are some pretty friendly lions here. I think I’m too tired to comment to the extend that I want to, so I’ll have to come back to it tomorrow.
Nick, please don’t think I believe for one minute that what ex-gays go through compares with the long-suffering history of gays. But do imagine just for a moment being in a no-man’s land (a bit like DM described), shunned by the community you were once part of or being pulled back into it like a crab trying to escape a bucket, mistrusted by those who should be helping you and wondering just who on earth you are. Your solution would be, so just quit trying to escape and get back in the bucket where you belong. But it’s not that simple. There is no freedom in that bucket for some people. They hear a different call. They see a different reality.
DM,
I think you’ll find I’m one of the friendliest people commenting on XGW to evangelical same sex attracted people choosing to remain celibate (see the comments section of this XGW piece.) Having lived celibately myself (though not for religious reasons), I can appreciate this path.
Debbie,
You are not in a “Lion’s Den.” Please do not place yourself in martyr status here. We’re all on equal ground. It is not “us vs. you.” Ask Wendy Gritter and Jay Holloman. David Roberts did a great job in a lengthy comment explaining why you would be receiving certain responses. In addition, I’d like to add that any unkind words you receive from XGW’s commentariat are certainly not equivalent to throwing you to the lions. I recommend rising above it and responding (if you choose to respond) in a courteous intelligent matter, or simply ignoring those people.
Emily,
I know you’re cool about that stuff, and never meant to suggest otherwise. I was just saying…I think there *could* be more to an exgay’s appreciation of our changing culture besides “Mmmmm…fresh meat.”
Debbie,
It’s really not that bad. I’ve been reading XGW (and very occasionally commenting) since 2003. It’s not a lion’s den–this is more like a petting zoo with the occasional annoying miniature goat who gnaws on the leg of your pants.
I should note that the experience you describe is not mine–not that you said it was. I was never shunned or mistreated in any way by my LGB friends, nor did they try to “pull me back in” to anything. They were mostly just worried about me for a while–which like I said, is very understandable if you put yourself in their shoes.
LOL, what a picture. Should we hang up a sign, “Don’t feed the goats”?
Debbie:
Who are you kidding? On the TruthWinsOut.org website, we have video from Exodus’ Pure Passion TV show where they are repeatedly calling gay people “perverse” and “sexaully broken.” In case you have not noticed, these are not kind ways to describe people. It is abusive. It is wrong. Stop it.
As for your new website, theformers, the term came from my book, Anything But Straight. I don’t think the name of your website is funny or cute. Ex-Gay ministries take people who have made poor choices in life - drugs, unsafe sex, alcohol abuse, etc. - and exploit them. They say, “we will help you clean up your act and offer love.” But there are very cruel strings attached to this so-called “love.”
When straight people have bad relationships and abuse drugs we don’t blame thier heterosexuality for these problems and say, “we’ll love you if you turn gay.” So, why must you try to turn GLBT people who hit rough patches in their lives heterosexual?
As far as I’m concerned, you and other sexual engineers are taking advantage of desperate people at the most vulnerable point in their lives. You might mean well, but make no mistake - these “formers” are being damaged. Sometimes severely.
“I have a student who came to me that he is gay and struggling. I did not say that he needed to accept his homosexuality.”
Great leadership Aaron. Thank God I had teachers, unlike you, who actually stood for something and told me to accept myself. If this poor kid spends 10 years in the closet beating himself up, how did you help him?
And it would be “difficult??” Please.
Running a marathon is “difficult,” ex-gay ministries is a rip-off and a waste of time. I’m not sure why saying so to this poor young man was so difficult for you.
Furthermore, your private vs. public debate is sophistry. A nation full of people who privately view homosexuality as Sin will not lead to a nation that is pro-gay either legally or socially. It is not a coincidence that in states where fundamentalism is rampant, there are no gay rights. Um, isn’t it obvious?
I can’t imagine anyone saying that they have “no problem” with racists who use the Bible to justify hate, as long as they do their hating in private. So, why is it okay to consider homosexuality a sin?
We can agree that people have the right to believe what they want. But, to say that you have no problem with it is hard to fathom and defies reality. We should all have a huge problem when religion is used to justify bigotry.
Because there are people who interpret the Bible to mean women can’t preach. Because there are people who interpret the Bible to mean that I’m sinning when I eat bacon. Because there are people who interpret the Bible to mean polygamy is OK. That’s the beauty of free speech - it’s free. That’s the beauty of privacy - it’s private. The same rights that allow prayer groups and GSA’s to meet in school also allow gay people to have sexual relations behind closed doors without fear of prosecution. Privacy.
And where their freedom ends, mine begins - and vice versa. Because I CAN preach on the street if I want to. Because bacon is so readily available for us “sinners” you can buy it in a CVS pharmacy. Because people can have as many simultaneous sexual partners as they want - monogamy is not the law. Because freedom of religion means people can use the same medieval and early Christian writings Nazi’s used to convince Christians of the Jewish “problem” in Germany to preach a Sunday sermon in New York City today.
It’s freedom of speech and it’s America, that’s why it’s “OK.”
Yes, Emily, you’re right. This is not a lion’s den. I was speaking tongue-in-cheek.
That I named the Web site and outreach The Formers is not, however meant to be light or amusing, Wayne. It’s biblical, actually. Yes, you were the inspiration for it. Thanks. So are there any former anythings in your view?
I have been on the front lines in recovery work for quite a while now, so I have seen all manner of problems and combinations of them. I’ve seen denial, anger-to-rage, false guilt (there is none worse than that experienced by someone struggling with same-sex attraction), harmful churchiness that made we want to throw some Christians to the lions … you name it. I have the privilege of serving in ministry (I am talking about at my church, not in the make-believe church of ex-gayness Wayne and others insist on placing me in) with some of the most amazing “wounded healers” anywhere. I am not aware of anyone whom we have damaged. I am aware of many we have helped, some to the point of assuming leadership roles themselves.
Wayne, I know you can find many bones to pick with Exodus. I am not Exodus, I am not Focus on the Family, I am not Jerry Falwell or any other Boogey Man you want to invent. There is a history in the ex-gay “movement” I want no part of. So be kind and fair enough not to associate me with it. You can sit back and observe me–I have no doubt you will–and when you know me better, say anything you wish. Maybe one day I’ll have my name in BIG letters on that right-hand side of your Web site.
The people I work with simply ask those who thirst and hunger for wholeness to come, just as they are, to the well. We cannot make them come and we cannot force them to drink and they are free to leave if they wish. It’s not our promises we are standing on. It is God who does the promising and the healing. We simply offer ourselves as proof of change and walk with them as far as they want to go. Now, why is that wrong to you?
Ok, I’ve had the chance to look at your website, Debbie, and while your tone is certainly nice I see nothing fundamentally different between your group and the other ‘ex-gay’ ministries I’m more familiar with. In fact, you link to these other ministries quite extensively and given that you have articles on at least one of them (e.g. NARTH), I suspect you have a much closer relationship to them than you have stated. Wayne Besen and I have many disagreements on various issues but I can see his point here in that there doesn’t appear to be anything really new with your group. You say that you are “not Exodus” and that “there is a history in the ex-gay ‘movement’ [you] want no part of”, yet why then are you so closely linked with them? Links to Exodus are found throughout your website, along with others like Love In Action, JONAH, NARTH, etc. The same usual suspects that most of us here have found to be so damaging. You ask Besen not to associate you with the poor behavior of these groups but you yourself have chosen to heavily associate with them and I do not see how you can separate the wheat from the chaff here. This is not really about religious disagreements and only partially about the whole ‘ex-gay’ movement. We have very good reason to be highly skeptical of your motives given how these groups have worked so strongly to deny us full rights in this country. The irony for me personally is that you and I probably hold similiar political views in other areas Marine, but on this we could not be further apart. Actually, this is a good example right here: when you were serving as a “public affairs officer in the U.S. Marine Corps” and “struggl[ing] with same-sex attraction”, should you have been allowed to serve or have been kicked out because of this “struggle”? These are the kinds of things that anger me more than anything else about this: the imposition of religious doctrine onto society-at-large through force of law. My rights are not subject to the religious dictates of any group.
It’s freedom of speech and it’s America, that’s why it’s “OK.”
Actually, it is not okay, Emily. You are confusing the right to say or beleive something - which we both agree with - and whether it is good for a person to hold noxious views. One of the most important things we can do is express our view that calling homosexuality a sin is always ugly and wrong. It is never okay.
Freedom of speech is a two way street. Now, if these people don’t enforce these views through public policy, we can live with them, with minimal friction. But, a world of people who think being gay is against God leads to horrible things. You know, the Holocaust would have never happened if not for thousands of years of people calling Jews “Christ Killers.” The underlying root of much evil comes from distorting or using Scripture as a club.
Debbie, you act as if your clients come to you free of societal pressure. For a person to walk in your door and want sexual engineering, means that they consider their basic ability to love - a beautiful thing - something ugly. That in and of itself is tragic. And, people only feel this way because they are told from a young age they are bad and they are beaten down. You are exploiting years of negative conditioning with your false promises. You would do well to turn your ex-gay ministry into a pro-gay one. Then, you will truly be helping people.
Debbie, why are you so obsessed about this ex-gay thing that you wake up each morning to sexually engineer people? Aren’t there better things to do with your time? Are there not hungry people to feed?
I would admit, just like John, that I am not exactly in agreement with most of the methods of Wayne Besen, but Ms Debbie, I am afraid he has got some strong points here. And to add to that, why “ex-gay” again? How many more times do you wish to address some gays and lesbians as “strugglers”? Why not address the same sexual issue with homosexuals with the same weight you would deal with heterosexuals? Why blur the lines with the obsession of having to “help” people be celibate when there are other more important ministries to do for the world? Is the ex-gay propoganda more important than feeding the hungry? Are two people in love who happen to be the same sex, something more sickening than war?
And in your ministry, have you ever give your attendees the benefit of the doubt “informed choice”? Would you, as a ministry leader, actually tell them that change is possible, but there are no promises or guarantees? If they fail to live up to your planned standards of ex-gay-ship, would you actually in your heart or speech, feel that they are failures of some sort; or do you have the capacity in your heart to actually affirm them in their convictions that maybe, just maybe they have found peace in their personal relationship with Christ?
And in all consumate fairness, would you tell them that the “struggles” these gays and lesbians under your care may not be internal but actually caused by stigma, prejudice and discrimination, that the main causes for it are actually from some sections of the religious fundamentals themselves?
John, I link to the other ministries, including to some articles at their sites I believe are helpful, because I believe each has something useful to offer. As I mentioned to Wayne earlier (at TWO), there should be a disclaimer so people understand I am not agreeing wholesale with everything they say or do. So I will add one, which may or not placate some of you. But I am not throwing these ministries or organizations under the bus, as you would have me do. There are some good people there. If this causes folks to get their shorts in a bunch, so be it.
What is new at The Formers other than a new face? I’ll let time take care of answering that. We only just got started. There will be an amazing video there soon, the likes of which you are not likely to have seen.
John said, “My rights are not subject to the religious dictates of any group.” That’s right. We have a Constitution that keeps it that way. Still, there is a great clash over how that document addresses the rights of a class of people to redefine a foundational institution that had existed as it is for milennia. In the long run, I think some kind of compromise will be reached. I assure you I am not going out to hang myself on the day that happens. Let it happen.
John, I need to clarify for you and others that I had very little struggle with same-sex attraction during my years in the Corps. I can’t say why as I had significant struggles before and after. As I told a group of folks recently, it may have been because I had found something that gave my life meaning for the first time.
Wayne, people in search of spiritual and emotional healing (they’re not clients as I am not a licensed clinician) come to me and my fellow workers with more baggage than they can carry–societal pressures, guilt, shame, confusion at every level. They do not come for “sexual engineering,” whatever you make that out to be. I don’t see their brokenness as a sexual problem. It goes much deeper than that. Why do so many gays bow to the throne of sexuality? The capacity for sex is but one part of our nature. The people I work with are relationally broken more than anything. The first relationship we seek to restore is the one with God. All others will naturally follow.
As for the hunger thing, another one of those elitist talking points meant to cast a shadow of hypocrisy over the Church: I submit that the worst kind of hunger is spiritual hunger. Jesus made that clear. I like to help both kinds. So did he.
And to those who are hung up on my working to help strugglers with same-sex attraction when perhaps there are worse things to focus on, let me say that we (I am speaking of Freedom Ministry at TRBC) have far more issues to deal with than that one. We are addressing a growing array of problems all the time. And the larger church family is meeting the physical and spiritual needs of the surrounding community–and that help emanates out to other regions of the world–in ways that are unprecedented in the church’s history.
Yuki, you said, “Would you, as a ministry leader, actually tell them that change is possible, but there are no promises or guarantees?” Yes, I would and I do. Just be careful when you use that word “promise.” There are no guarantees that an individual will complete the journey, but there are many promises in God’s Word. It’s a two-way street, however. He feeds the birds, but he doesn’t throw the food into their nests. They have to seek for it. Would you tell me that I have not changed? If so, on what basis? You don’t have a clue.
Wayne,
You are right in that Christianity’s pervasion in Europe ultimately caused the Holocaust.
But it is in the Bible that Jews are the children of the devil. And they are indeed responsible for Jesus’ death. That will not change. The Bible will not change. someone’s religion will not change. I will always be considered “not Jewish” by the orthodox Jews because it is my father who is Jewish rather than my mother. These things WILL NOT CHANGE. People will believe what they believe.
Wayne, as much as you would like to, you cannot and will never ever develop the power to change people’s religious convictions.
So then where will change come?
Not in by saying “what you believe is wrong.” because that rebuttal could be hurled back instantly to the declarer.
Living by example is how you change hearts and minds. People who are open to changing their hearts will see that we are just like them, people who love and desire to be loved. Hammering into people the idea that “what they believe is wrong” is the tactic of fundamentalists and ex-gay ministries.
Combatting myth, like the myth that Jews control the banking industry and are constantly conspiring to desecrate the Wafer, or the myth that gays are sex fiends constantly seeking the next one night stand, is the way to go.
Well, Ms Debbie, I do have a clue.
No one that is born comfortably with a sexual orientation that prohibits them from loving an opposite sex parter would call themselves and their very existence a “lifestyle”.
No gay or lesbian, or transgender for that equation, would consider themselves less in God’s eyes to the extent they are couched to “change” into whatever “change” is presented by whatever human standards placed upon them.
No decent person on earth would brand a sexual orientation as “deviant” just because they cannot handle or understand or know
No God’s Word would ever be deemed as an absolute truth as deemed and presented by your sex especially, especially when your position as a female authority is questionable even by God’s standards.
By the latter, you should know very well that God’s Word absolutely prohibits you from teaching men or have authority over them. That your very salvation is only through childbearing ever since Eve tempted Adam with the apple. You are well learnt enough to know that. So why not start a ministry for Ex-Female ministers?
It stops here. You may be trying to deviate from the questions you feel uncomfortable in answering. But unfortunately, you still have not answered my questions:
You know very well it is written in the Bible that SEX itself is the problem. That is why it is not encouraged for men to look at a woman lustfully. That is why it is better to marry, and not be divorced. Ex-Divorces ministry, anyone?
You already perceive and convinced yourself your very being and existence is a sin and the only way to appease the God that you know is to be celibate. Fine. That is your right, and there is nothing wrong with that. That is your personal convictions and your personal relationship with Christ Jesus.
The problem is, you still do not wish to acknowledge that many of those who wants your “aid” perhaps are just the same victims that the ex-gay propaganda produces. And by not admitting, even though you know very well that groups like Exodus and PFOX spout imposement of their heterosexual supremacy over other sexual orientations like homosexuality; that those “struggling” may not be victims of the perceived “sin”, but against a society of dogmatic views and the use of religion to create an atmosphere of oppression. You have the responsibility of making sure that those under your care has the best information possible for the best choice.
And exercising your connections to Exodus, Love In Action, NARTH, JONAH… even though you said no… all but washed away your credibility because it shows you lied even though you seem to be neutral. So since you claim you should have placed a disclaimer on their highly questionable materials, can TWO sources be in it, along with the highly factual and informative Box Turtle Bulletin? You can also get some materials from Mel White at Soulforce.org. Give the person the opportunity to choose and I hope of you this, do not ever think that your way and your ministry is the only way to go for “healing of sexual brokeness.” Many have gone your way thinking this is the way to go, but ended up in years of emotional and mental anguish, and hurt that engulf families too.
Or worse come to worse, as God’s Word commanded you of women, you should reconsider your decision to head a ministry such as this. It is totally against the Will of God and His Word (sorry Emily, but there is not interpretation here, it is word by word written in the Bible).
Or perhaps you would not. You should well read back when you said:
Then said:
So cherry pick the Bible all you want that edifies your sense of comfort, and spread your magic powder all over the same sex attracted individuals who are just trying to find their place in this world. Unfortunately, no one can ignore what is in the 10 commandments: Thou Shalt Not Lie.
This all may seem harsh to you. But as the very victim of these people doing cherry picking of Bible verses trying to “change” my existence, I really do not wish the same for other people. Especially when I wasted half of my life having somebody telling me what they think is for the best of me, confusing me even though I know I am okay. I now recognize, my struggles are not with God, my struggles are with other people’s version of Christ implanted in my mind.
Actually Yuki, you just proved my point I’m trying to make to Wayne.
And besides, since I don’t follow your bible, it doesn’t apply to me anyway.
Debbie, you are plainly a functioning bisexual. Whatever it is you needed to “change” to stay in a heterosexual relationship, it wasn’t your sexual orientation: “… the trauma of a failed first marriage …” [1]
Some advice: don’t misrepresent or reinvent yourself here. We can read, you know, and most here didn’t come down in the last shower.
So there be no confusion, let everyone be very clear that you ran a ministry at Falwell’s church. For at least 9 years. [2] And you were a “field contributor to Focus on the Family’s social policy research effort.”
Hence, this statement by you to Wayne Besen is a little hard to swallow.
Except for, and apart from working for Falwell and shilling for Dobson, recycling every bit of nonsense from these very people on your website. “Your” articles are nothing but a regurgitation populated by FOTF, PFOX, OneByOne, NARTH, Throckmorton etc etc.
True, there are also those times when your own views are offered.
To the general public:
The charming articles you write for The Amy Foundation:
For NARTH:
And let us not forget your own off-this-planet FAQs, and please name the source for this:
Good God. She’s just another one.
Wow, grantdale. You’re right. That last quote is extremely telling.
As I wrote last night in my long item at Truth Wins Out, Debbie Thurman’s autobiographical sketch suggests that she suffers unresolved personal mental-health issues that go well beyond what has been discussed here.
Thurman also has lied — several times, as TWO and Grantdale point out — about the available science regarding sexual orientation.
Like other ex-gay amateurs, she has no professional or academic qualifications to be messing around with the fragile mental health of others — especially those who are already more “sexually honest” and consistent in their Christian morals than Thurman.
Thurman’s approach to mental health is to tell clients that it’s Christian to deny, suppress, blame, sidestep key issues, and pray for “healing” for what apparently isn’t broken. God and science have already made clear that healing won’t happen for most people, because most people can’t change their sexual orientation.
Nutshell: She’s not a successful or trustworthy counselor, she’s an opportunistic political activist who inflicts her unbalanced politics and falsifications of science upon people in the name of “Christian counseling.”
Good Grief! I was half hoping she can come closer to the middle fence, but here she is throwing grenades at us!
Anyway, kudos to GrantDale and Mike Airhart for the truth on Debbie Thurman.
Jeez, ya might have warned me Mike A and saved me the trouble!
I was going to mention her complete (and dangerous) lack of any qualifications or over-sight, but I was worried I’d be called an “elitist” or something else unflattering.
Chillingly, there’s another quote that made my eyes pop in the NARTH screed:
“politicization of science?”
where I do draw the line between accepting people who think homosexuality is a sin and calling them bigots is where they try to justify their religious belief through science.
Jews are opposed to eating pork and shellfish, but there is no doubt in their minds that they can easily be properly prepared so that there is no harm that comes from eating them.
If Christians can admit that there is no inherit harm in falling in love with people of the same sex, and pursuing relationships with them, even though they say “God opposes it,” then there is no problem on my end. Leave religion to religion and science to science.
Wow, grantdale. I only had time to skim through her website and didn’t read all the articles there. I see that my skepticism of Ms. Thurman was well-placed. There’s no further need for dialogue on this as far as I’m concerend since her ‘ministry’ is simply a re-packaging of the usual that I find so objectionable and repugnant from the Religious Right. I would like to respond to Ms. Thurman’s original question:
Ms. Thurman, at that point perhaps you will then understand a bit about what each one of us have gone through, in different ways. Funny thing though, while members of your side in this would deny me my rights, if not my very existence, and wish to caste me as a leper in the Church as well as in society, I still believe in the Constitution and will fight for your rights.
Oh, and just so there’s no confusion: I do not consider the fading supremacy of the Religious Right over society to be part of your “rights”. Nope, you are entitled to nothing more and nothing less than what every American is.
LOL. Are you all feeling better after your feeding frenzy? Was that goat-grazing or lion-chomping? Might need to take something for the indigestion. Talk about “cherry picking.” Note the quotes strung together out of context. You’ve still got a lot of stuff to mine. Have fun.
This stuff just does not offend me. It humbles me a bit, but I’m sure I needed that. It’s business as usual, and I could write the scripts. Oh, just to clear up any confusion, I have been married for 27 years. That is not a celibate arrangement, I assure you.
I also need to point out that the “research” I offered to FOTF was completely a volunteer thing. It was not a formal arrangement. It was mental health information provided during a time when the Congress was considering authorizing funds for universal mental health screening Big Brother-style (under a bad Bush policy), something many people were opposed to. I was following the progress of the proposed legislation and reporting back to them. You would probably have wanted them in your corner on this one.
Under Wayne’s definition–well “documented” in his book–I would be a certifiable mental case because I talk to God and He talks back. And if I wanted to play the infantile game of gotcha, I could put some of Besen’s more infamous quotes up for examination. And Mel White’s, for that matter. But I have no such need. I know who I am, whose I am and why I am here.
And to show you that I am not afraid of a little humility, I would take back some things I have written if I could. A few, to be sure. I imagine our current presidential and vice presidential candidates would, too. Life is a process of growing and learning. At least I don’t live with a TV camera or microphone shoved into my face to the extent Jerry Falwell did. That’s a guaranteed recipe for screw-ups. But I am big enough to be held accountable for everything I have said publicly, right or wrong. You don’t step into an arena such as this without knowing that. I think I’ll live to work another day. Many of them, God willing.
So, if I have offended where I should have known better, all I can do is offer my sincere apologies. And my first-born child. Just kidding. I really like her.
And so, I will exit this discussion in a similar manner as I did the other one. Some of the offense taken here is not directed at me but at God. Some I may well deserve. To sort that out would take two lifetimes, and I have much to do with the time remaining in this one.
Interesting how Debbie Thurman popped right in at the beginning of this thread to hijack the thread, turning it into something about the victimhood of being ex-gay. She also tries to paint herself as some sort of moderate. Thanks grantdale for exposing her for the typical dishonest, run-of-the-mill ex-gay political operative.
As for Randy… I find it interesting that he expresses concern about the safety issues that Senior Citizens had to face years ago (as if people aren’t killed today for being gay). Yet, he seems completely blind to the ongoing harm that he has personally tried to do to today’s seniors.
Seniors are more likely to have their partner die. Without the protections that marriage afford, they risk losing their homes in their old age. They also don’t recieve Social Security Survivor Benefits, pension benefits or any of the other protections that heterosexual married survivors depend on to be able to stay in their homes and live out the rest of their years after losing a spouse.
Instead of looking to the past, I would encourage Randy to look at what he is doing in the present to make the lives of younger and older gay people more dangerous and more unfair. While I have seen no evidence that anyone can change their sexual orientation, I can assure professional ex-gay political operatives that they CAN change their behavior.
John,
Debbie left the other forum we had been dialoguing on. She exhibits behaviors that remind me again of why I had to leave fundamentalism. Basically, the strategy is thus: I am already committed to the interpretation of the Bible that I hold (which of course, is THE correct interpretation), but I will talk to these people who disagree to show them that I’m willing to talk about the issue (which they’re really not, they’re out to convince you). Then, when the evidence begins to cause them problems (i.e. they can’t make it match to their interpretation of the Bible), they pull out of the discussion with the very preachy rhetoric that they had originally said gets us no where (”we need to put aside these things and examine the evidence” they might have said). Thus, their motive is revealed. They then in anger resort to accusing the opposition of unfaithfulness to God or suppressing the truth in their sin. From a philosophical perspective the reasoning is atrocious. They are so close-minded that they will not humble themselves to realize that it wasn’t the Bible that erred (the true inner fear that drives their anger), but it was their interpretation that erred. I haven’t taken the time to read the entire debate on this thread, but from what I did read, it appears to have gone the same way it did in the other thread.
Just wanted to add my thoughts seeing that I used to be “one of them” (I wonder if that qualifies me to be a Former!)
Tut, tut, Andrew. That was a rather dishonest assessment that you so eloquently gave. I could apply your own rationale to you. Did I say anything in anger here? I am passionate about some things, true. But I specifically said I did not take offense when I was (angrily) gang-bashed. Rule number one: Only gays are allowed to be angry. In fact, I humbled myself, apologizing for any past sins and offenses (you all seem to take great delight in dredging up anything and everything in print–but all’s fair in love and war). And you admitted that you didn’t even read everything in this thread. You must have missed that part.
Let me ask you this: Is there any room on your planet for even the hint of a possibility that you and your interpretations of Scripture may be wrong? Because I don’t see you or anyone else here demonstrating any humility in that regard. How many gays have I talked to, here and elsewhere, in the past few days who desperately want me to admit that I just might be wrong … about anything? Duh! No, I know it all, just like you apparently do.
Absolute truth to you, yes or no:
1. Change is not possible.
2. Therefore, there is no such thing as an ex-gay.
3. The Bible could not possibly be saying that homosexuality is a sin because my scholar is smarter than yours and besides, it just feels right, regardless of how God made the plumbing. That God. What a sense of humor.
4. All Christians who believe change is possible or who (Gasp!) say they are actual examples of change are crazy … or liers … or evil conspirators (pick one or pick ‘em all).
5. Ex-gay and Christian in the same breath is an oxymoron … or maybe it’s just a moron).
Oh gosh. I must sound just a little angry. Someone’s sensitive feelings might get hurt. Bad me.
Well, I haven’t run off. I guess you’re wrong about that one, too.
Oh gosh. I must sound just a little angry. Someone’s sensitive feelings might get hurt. Bad me.
If you lean a little more to the left, you can get the nail to go into your wrist better. And the crown of thorns is slipping, give it nudge, k?
As long as your here, how about regaling us with your views on slavery and political correctness?
Nice try, Boo-hoo. Doesn’t work. Honest debate just too much for ya? Is it the honesty or the debate part that’s too hard?
Debbie, maybe you should take 5 and a breather. I find that counting my breathing helps me when I’m angry.
Funny how Debbie’s tone has changed since Grantdale & Mike Airhart called her bluff.
I think Grantdale’s quotes are extensive enough that the claim that they have been taken out of context doesn’t hold.
Once Thurman questioned whether Matthew Shepard was responsible for his own murder I ceased to care to listen to anything she has to say.
I can’t stand it when people have the gall to say Matthew Shepard - all 120 pounds and 5′2″ of him - was any kind of “threat” to those two big guys. They tied him to a fence and beat him so badly it looked like he’d been through a war. and then left him to die in the cold. Alone.
People don’t respond to “flirting” that way who don’t have some severe hate boiling within their blood. No act of “flirting” - no matter how agressive - is deserving of the hatred that was unleashed upon him.
How inhuman do you have to be to think that this young man could be a “threat” to the beasts that murdered him?
Let’s back up a bit Debbie. In your first few comments, you asked why some people “vilify” exgays. I gave you some reasons, and suggested that you review our archives for a better understanding of this matter. I’m guessing you haven’t done that or not much. Let’s take a single example.
This is a complete lie which stems from the “research” of Paul Cameron. He has been debunked by liberal and conservative professionals alike, including by Warren Throckmorton, whose materials you include as well. This is not a matter of personal religious belief or interpretation, you are propagating a lie which denigrates GLBTs everywhere. This is only one example of those grantdale illustrated above in a perfectly reasonable manner. How can we trust you or believe you when you give lies in response to someone potentially confused and seeking guidance — a vulnerable state at best?
When this is pointed out and some are understandable upset by it, you respond with a bit of cavalier sarcasm, and at least partially blaming the reaction here as a reaction to God. Does this sound familiar? Weren’t we just discussing this? Who is in the wrong here and who should take responsibility? You are posting a lie on your site, God didn’t do that. It is not your beliefs that are in question.
It bothers me also that you have almost boasted about having no professional training. The reason you give, that you don’t want to “bow to that kind of politically correct pressure” is not valid to my mind. A lot of people who share some version of your world view have achieved the proper training and education to do the things you say you want to do. It seems to me it’s more a matter of how much you really care about the wellbeing of those you work with.
This would not really be an issue to me if you were just posting a blog with your own personal thoughts, but you are attempting to construct a movement of sorts, to address people with possibly fragile mental issues not having anything to do with their sexual orientation. Yet not only are you not professionally trained, but the material on your site often lacks the basic supporting references that XGW requires in each of our own posts. Really, anyone can do that and it gives the reader a way to test what you say with the proper resource.
I have since run into a lot of things on your site that disturb me, but I thought one clear example might help to clarify that what’s going on here is not simply anger about who or what you are. And if you are serious about representing God and caring for others, I would think such material on your site (or coming from your mouth) would concern you and you would move to correct it. That’s why your reaction was disappointing.
I was not aware that you were still going to post, for you had said in the other forum that you had realized we couldn’t be convinced and were done with it or something to that effect. I apologize if I misunderstood you. My evaluation of fundamentalists is a psychology person’s interpretation of what cognitively takes place in the minds of fundamentalists - I am not saying they are consciously aware of it, but being a former fundamentalist and talking to many others, that is the conclusion I came to. If you think it’s unfair, I’m open to hear your side of it and I will happily adjust my view if I am mistaken.
I wanted to answer your questions, but first let me say that I gave a lengthy response in the previous thread we were talking on to the issue of whether or not someone could change and explained my reasons. You did not even attempt to make a response to what I said, but I will assume that was an unintended oversight on your part so here goes:
It is not possible through empirical methods to establish this with one hundred percent certainty because it is an absolute universal statement. Let’s take the statement “Change is possible” for that is easier to test. As I wrote before there is no credible scientific study that I have read to date that suggest that a statistically significant change in one’s orientation can take place. I do not doubt the experience of change that some people have claimed. All I said in the other post was that I believe it may be possible if