Alan Chambers, November 17th 2009: Until I read the horrible comment Scott Lively made in World Magazine today about homosexuality needing to criminalized I was convinced that his intentions were also honorable there.

In a BoxTurtleBulletin article from March 9th, 2009, Jim Burroway reports:

Exodus has made an adjustment to its web site. Until today, a visitor to Exodus’ web site could find a link to Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively’s article ["Homosexuality and the Nazi Party"]…

…When Exodus removed their references to Paul Cameron [ article], they did so with a retraction which reads, “This article has been removed due to the inaccuracies surrounding the research of Paul Cameron.” At the time, Exodus President Alan Chambers promised that in “coming months we will be doing a survey of the content on our site to determine… if there are other articles or links that need to be removed.” If Exodus did conduct such a survey, the Lively article apparently survived.

And as Warren Throckmorton notes in an article dated June 25th, 2009:

This is the same article that Exodus International linked to but then removed in light of the Uganda ex-gay conference. Although Mr. Lively is an avid supporter of NARTH, that organization recently removed references to his work from their website.

Given Chambers’ respect for Lively until just recently, was he even aware of the link to the existence of the Lively article, and/or its removal?

If the PRESIDENT of the organization is/was unaware of the content on the Exodus website, or the removal of that content, then who’s running the show over there?

(if those links are screwed up, I tried everything to get them to fit right)

Exodus or anyone who believes their Bible based ideology, has never needed or required any caveats or directives regarding to what extent that ideology will be used. The target of it is VERY specific and some areas of the world are more dangerously fertile for that target to be subject to abuse than others.
In the minds of many, the abuse is considered rightful, useful and necessary.

And although Exodus or anyone else who agrees that abuse, threatening the loss of freedom goes too far, the objective is STILL the same. To require religious discipline ONLY on those suspected of being gay. Even Exodus agrees this is an undesirable, less holy way to live.

That’s ALL anyone needs to hear. No hard sell necessary. And so far, even the threat of incarceration, institutionalization, torture and violence hasn’t really kept gay people FROM being gay has it?

So, does it not occur to Alan Chambers that HIS methods or beliefs in how to change gay people is considered worthless and too tame to get the job done?

We’re considered by many non Western cultures to be WAY too lenient with our social and moral standards. Especially where women and gay folks are concerned.

And just as our society underestimated who they’ve been dealing with in those cultures, this is more of the same. Going into the Uganda situation, with the only connection of concern being Christianity and homosexuality, and arrogantly assuming that Ugandans now have to change their approach, when THIS culture is considered KOWTOWING to gay people and their demands!

Even conservative Christians in THIS country have resented the change with the APA and DSM regarding mental illness, and what is seen as an encroachment on civil and moral society at large.
And influencing pop culture in particular.

Alan Chambers is behaving as if he had no idea to what extent the damage would go and who was part of influencing how Ugandans would deal with THEIR ‘homosexual problem’.
Ugandans were ALWAYS going to handle it this way, they simply got a validation from certain parties where they knew they’d feel no consequences to be concerned about. Really, do they HAVE to give a sh*t?
No.
They DON’T have to care what Dr. T or Alan Chambers says.

The fire was burning and more fuel was added, and now Chambers is showing up to the conflagration with a water pistol. He might be sincere in wanting to help put out the fire, but he should have considered that his organization already had the fire well under way, and for a long, long time now.

Unless he’s thinking HIS butt will get burned in this did he load his water pistol.

Even here, where gays and lesbians are losing their careers, losing their children in custody battles against ex gay exes and losing their rights to marry and protections against the tyrannies of the majority, Chambers and his ilk court all the while exactly what NO ONE can fight, especially gays and lesbians.

Religious ideology that engages government force against easily scapegoated targets.

And in countries under the stress that Uganda has been, and what our country is rolling towards in these hard economic times, rage is a hard thing to fight.
We’re seeing it everywhere, and gay people are the easiest to attack and blame for every ill of mankind.

Alan, if you’d EVER had an education like I’ve had, in the tactics of the worst systemically bigoted paths of law and government, you would have known what you were messing with.
And you would have rejected the people you have embraced, roundly and in no uncertain terms

But you had your own agenda and the extent of influence and damage didn’t matter to you.
And now you can’t do anything truly EFFECTIVE for the people who were going to suffer the most.

If you’d had the stuff in you to recognize what you were dealing with, your life would have taken another course.
But it did in the first place BECAUSE you don’t have the character or the necessary moral and constitutional mettle to fight what gays and lesbians REALLY have to.

And homosexuality doesn’t put up the fight. So your ‘struggle’ with it is so trite. Compared to what gay Ugandans are struggling with.
Now, you’re dealing with a whole other issue that has nothing to do with you being gay or ex gay.
And that is relevance.
And are you struggling to have it here? I would think so, because your water pistol IS irrelevant to the issue facing fellow gay and lesbians Ugandans a half a world away.

I just don’t want your hard work of keeping Exodus accountable go to waste whenever they just manage to do the right thing long enough to keep the dogs at bay, as it were. I’m just tired of their pattern of behavior, is all.

Believe me, so am I, but I am praying that this may mark a change in that pattern. I maintain a certain level of skepticism — and today, for a change, some level of optimism as well.

Read the interview here.

This is the second time you have made this lame remark. It is insulting, not only to battered women but to the writers here (past and present) who have donated thousands of hours and a lot of life energy to hold Exodus, et al, accountable over the past 7+ years.

I apologize, David, if I have offended you or anyone else who misunderstood my point here. Perhaps I expressed myself inadequately. It is precisely because of the hard work that you and others have done over the years that prompted me to say this. I don’t believe my analogy is “lame,” but we’ll have to agree to disagree on that point. I just don’t want your hard work of keeping Exodus accountable go to waste whenever they just manage to do the right thing long enough to keep the dogs at bay, as it were. I’m just tired of their pattern of behavior, is all.

And thank you, Michael, for clarifying your position. I know your history with the organization, and I appreciate your willingness to engage with those that have brought you a lot of grief.

Christopher said:

I swear… the relationship that some people have with Exodus is that of a battered wife and her husband. They just keep coming back for more, despite all the false promises. It’s completely dysfunctional, and I don’t understand why it keeps continuing. Someone has to break this cycle.

This is the second time you have made this lame remark. It is insulting, not only to battered women but to the writers here (past and present) who have donated thousands of hours and a lot of life energy to hold Exodus, et al, accountable over the past 7+ years. You have made your opinion clear, go rant about your indignation elsewhere if you must.

Then why even bother? And why is it “good” for them to do this? To what ends?

It needed to me done. They needed to say it. Do they really believe it? I think they do. Were they blinded by their zeal to do something that may result (and indeed may have already have resulted) in suffering for others? I think so.

They issued statements denouncing this law, but have not really apologized for their role in it. Is that OK? No. Would folks believe them if they did? Probably not.

Does these admittedly tardy denunciations absolve them? No. Were they stupidly uniformed — or resistant to their wise counsel and warnings of others? It seems so. Did they do their homework before giving Don their blessings? No.

Do I remain somewhat skeptical? Of course. I left Excodus for a reason and have been expressing open distrust for Exodus for some time. Will they keep their word? Only time will tell.

I think it is good (morally) that they did it whether or not it will do any good.

Then why even bother? And why is it “good” for them to do this? To what ends? Exodus has proven that their role in society is to lie about the nature of sexual orientation in order to provide cover for an anti-gay political agenda. This will not change. The most grievous example of this agenda was their participation in the Uganda conference despite repeated warnings.

This was a moral failure of the highest order. The blood of Brian Pande cries from the ground, and you think that a weakly-worded letter to the Ugandan government is “moral”?

I’m utterly speechless. I really am.

They issued it as press release. Alan is promising to do more. At this point, I choose to believe him and I intend hold him to it.

Isn’t it clear by now that Exodus always goes back on their promises? Remember the “we’re not going to be political anymore” pledge? That lasted all of about five minutes.

So let’s say they break this promise, too? Then what will you do? Write a sternly worded blog post about it? We shouldn’t even be having any kind of conversation with Alan Chambers at this point. He’s either incredibly amoral, or incredibly stupid. Probably both. His personal moral failure is so deep and so grave, he has abdicated any right to speak with any authority anymore.

I swear… the relationship that some people have with Exodus is that of a battered wife and her husband. They just keep coming back for more, despite all the false promises. It’s completely dysfunctional, and I don’t understand why it keeps continuing. Someone has to break this cycle.

But David, why do you think this letter from Exodus will do any good whatsoever? Some people here are acting as if the Pope had made a major announcement. This is nowhere near in the same league.

I think it is good (morally) that they did it whether or not it will do any good.

There’s a time for soft-spoken diplomacy and a time for rebuke.

Maybe it’s time for some of both. For whatever reason, however late, insincere or inadequate some may feel it is, Exodus is on record that they oppose, even hate, the bill for several reasons. It’s on their website. They issued it as press release. Alan is promising to do more. At this point, I choose to believe him and I intend hold him to it.

l