Ex-Gay Watch

An article from the UK’s Daily Mail bears this title: How I went from committed lesbian to a happily married mother of four. It describes British comedienne Jackie Clune’s winding testimonial as a woman who, once “committed” to her lesbian identity, decided to “try men again” after growing tired of lousy relationships and rigid, self-imposed stereotypes. In a 2005 article from The Times entitled Love, etc. Clune called lesbian culture “dictatorial and intimidating” and “the opposite of the sapphic fluffy nirvana [she] expected.” She married a man and finally had a family, something she “never thought possible” as a lesbian.

The title of the article has the first red flag. Clune describes her girlfriends and her former self as being “committed lesbians.” As if being attracted to the same sex makes one a member of a club they then must commit to. This is as absurd as thinking that when one comes out they are given a copy of the mysterious “Gay Agenda™” or that if they “convert” others into members they’ll be rewarded with new toasters. More stereotypes and generalizations follow. At first attracted to men as a young woman, at age 22 Clune made a very important conscious decision.

I had studied feminist literature at university and it opened my eyes to the possibility of sexuality as a life choice.

She then “threw [her]self into the fullblown lesbian lifestyle – gay clubs, bars and pubs:”

From 1988 until 2000 I lived in lesbian households, drank in lesbian pubs, went on gay rights marches and viewed my long-term future as being exclusively with women.

During those 12 years she entered into several long-term committed relationships with women. Usually, if it’s a male ex-gay telling the story, they’ll say they entered into multiple short-term sex-centric trysts with men, because this is what is stereotypical. But among female gays, it is the long-term relationship that is the stereotype, and it comes with its own set of constricting features. This is just the beginning of Clune’s stereotypes and sweeping generalizations. Read more…

Ex-Gay Watch reported on Matthew C. Manning’s troubling criminal record in June, 2009.  Manning claims to have been “delivered from homosexuality in 1989 and miraculously healed from HIV/AIDS in 1994.”  He has claimed that this enabled him to help people wishing to be “delivered from homosexuality.”  Readers unfamiliar with Manning are invited to read our previous post for background.

What’s happened since last June

The day after last year’s post, Manning filed to expunge the conviction from 2005 per California penal code 1203.4.  It appears to have been granted on August 10, 2009.  This is something we contemplated in the original article — California law provides for this in some cases if the defendant follows all court imposed conditions. These are listed in our post from that time.  A reading of the statute indicates that the expungement has limits, especially if one is found guilty of another crime in the future.

It also seems he either tried to, or did sell his house in Santa Rosa.  We don’t currently have the records to know under what circumstances this was done.  His new ministry address is a UPS private mail box in San Francisco.

All references we could find indicate that his house was his main ministry location.  Aside from a period during which a local church allowed him to use a room at off hours for meetings, his home is the only thing we could find.  Copies of the ministry 990s bear this out with no payments to any property or office outside the home.  There are expenses claimed for a “ministry house” which we assume to be a reference to his home (or former home) in Santa Rosa.

There is also no mention of a board of directors, in spite of the fact that posts appear on Manning’s blog claiming to be from them, discussing Manning’s activities, claiming to give their blessings to this or that move, etc.  These posts follow Manning’s grammar and writing style closely.  It is our considered opinion that Manning is the sole “director” of Light House World Evangelism, Inc.  He is listed as president on the 990s, with his wife as secretary. Read more…

(Note: The relevant texts to this episode can be found here (adb/pdf)), and/or you can view the whole thing here.)

With that, we begin.

Dr. David Kyle Foster is the producer and co-host of a show called “Pure Passion.”:

David founded Mastering Life Ministries in 1987 and has been its director ever since. He is also the producer and host of “Pure Passion” – a televised outreach designed to equip the church to redemptively minister to those who are trapped in sexual sin and brokenness. … The goal of the program is to tell the world of God’s grace and love through Jesus Christ and His power to set anyone free from any sin or bondage.

Foster has a series of articles on homosexuality, rife with all the stale yet vicious antigay talking points:

Kyle Foster, 2008: The reality [of homosexuality] is a dramatically reduced life expectancy and the likelihood of contracting hepatitis, AIDS, or one of a host of diseases and infections, as a result of the unnatural perversity of homosexual activity.

Suicide among homosexuals is epidemic, not because society disapproves, as many would have you believe, but because these dear people feel trapped and condemned into a lifestyle and orientation that they know is out of whack.
–
And the faithfully monogamous gay couple myth – not even close. Such relationships are statistically nonexistent in the gay community.

On December 21st, 2009, the host of the show was Jayson Graves, a board member of Exodus International:

Welcome to Pure Passion. I’m Jayson Graves, and I’m your host for today’s program.

Today we have a man who has lived with the HIV virus for almost 30 years. His name is Jonathan Hunter, and since 1985 he’s been the director of a ministry to those with the AIDS virus, called “Embracing Life.”

After overdosing on drugs, he also had an after-death experience which utterly changed his life.

In my opinion, this episode exploited Jonathan Hunter’s near-death experience (NDE) in an attempt to convince their audience that there is now eye-witness testimony—proving once and for all—that Jesus Christ Himself is anti-gay.
Read more…

The Advocate is a well-known magazine that caters to the Queer community. It runs serious articles that inform readers of issues facing gays, and lighter fair for when you’ve read enough about Uganda’s legislative genocide for one day. One such piece is entitled “The Advocate’s 15 ‘Gayest’ Cities.” Randy Thomas, who is no longer “gay-identified” but for some reason still reads this prominent gay publication, has taken issue with the piece. Mike Albo, billed in the piece as an “intrepid amateur sociologist,” gives us his findings, with certain points emphasized by Randy Thomas:

Intrepid amateur sociologist Mike Albo searches for America’s 15 gayest burgs—based on a finely tuned (if totally arbitrary) calculus.

Long ago, gay people settled in our nation’s largest cities. There they spruced up all the property, created every art and fashion movement, and taught entire populations how to dance. They created gayborhoods like WeHo, Chelsea, South Beach—and pretty much queered all of San Francisco until even Laundromats had rainbow flag decals in their windows. About 10 years ago everyone else moved back into these nicely gentrified metropolises, and the lavender diaspora began. Now a slew of secondary cities are becoming gay epicenters.

This admittedly subjective search reveals spots that are much more pink than you might think. Determined by a completely unscientific but accurate statistical equation, these gayest cities may surprise you.

Of course, these are obviously cultural stereotypes, and Randy objects.

I hate math but it doesn’t take a mathematician to see that this “arbitrary calculus” has some highly questionable variables.

Is the criteria above for such a “lavender diaspora” truly what The Advocate thinks being a gay epicenter is about?  By the criteria above it appears they are saying that being gay is about political power/redefining marriage, gay activist data contextualizing the census, anonymous sex/online dating, gay bar culture and people who like to watch Brokeback Mountain or Birdcage.

You’d think that far right political activists wrote this article as a cultural meme to reinforce simplistic, and a couple of campy, stereotypes.

Mr. Albo includes zero criterion about gay centered or pro-gay churches/religious centers, no gay support groups, no attempt to study attitudes of the not gay neighbors … what about people who are in homosexual relationships but don’t identify as gay? … or with gay culture?

And lest anyone think he was reading The Advocate for anything other than investigative reporting:

Not that I affirm any of that or would presume to know what makes a “gayborhood … lavender diaspora.”

Apparently Randy’s obsession with being able to declare himself “free” of anything that might label him “gay” (or “gay-identified,” to put it in his terms) has limited his ability to understand satire. This article is a clear example of defensive humor, in which a cultural or ethnic minority forms a joke based on stereotypes used against them in order to diminish the stereotypes’ power. This is commonly seen in Jewish humor, among others. But no joke is too silly to be over-analyzed.

Plus, what good does it do to try and quantify the “gayest” cities? Regardless of the answer to that and even with the obvious satire the article could have been more thoughtful in trying to make its case.

Granted, Mr. Albo does say it is subjective and not scientific.  He obviously meant to deliver this article with a sense of humor.  He seriously doesn’t think the only creative dancing people in the world identify as gay … right?

The resulting list makes for an odd mix of cities that brings serious doubt about the accuracy of the results being truly reflective of the title of the article.  It also makes the purpose of publishing such an article suspect.

It “makes the purpose of publishing such an article suspect?” I suspect that the purpose of publishing the article was to make the predominantly gay readers of the magazine chuckle.

So, Randy Thomas and indeed all of Exodus can relax. Gays are no less committed to finding pro-gay places of worship, getting to know their gay neighbors, and entering into long-term loving relationships.

Re: “New Jersey State Senator and NAACP’s Bond Support Genderless Marriage While Rejecting Ex-Gay Rights” [12-9-09]

“…major scientific studies and mental health associations have stated homosexuality is not innate,” said Regina Griggs, director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX). “No scientific evidence has found a ‘gay gene.’ No DNA or medical test can determine if a person is homosexual. Sexual orientation is a matter of self-affirmation and public declaration…”

“Sexual orientation is a matter of self-affirmation and public declaration.”

Try it like this:

Human sexuality is a matter of self-affirmation and public declaration.
—
Apparently you’re not human until you say so in public.

Building on David Robert’s post on the Richard Cohen portion of The Rachel Maddow Show, Randy Thomas, Vice President of Exodus International, had some things to say about the exchange.

Randy Thomas: I am going to share a review of the actual interview and then move into how I believe she, and some other militant gay activists, are missing the point with regard to Uganda’s anti-homosexuality bill.

Transcript, edited for brevity, emphases mine:

MADDOW: But you have told them, particularly in your book, “Coming Out Straight,” which I understand you donated multiple copies of to this organization that‘s promoting this bill. You‘re telling them exactly what they need to hear in order to justify the kill-the-gays bill. I mean, your book portrays gay people as predators who must be stopped to protect the innocent.

COHEN: Oh, no, no, no.

MADDOW: Let me ask – I‘ll just read from your book, OK? Page 49, “Homosexuals are at least 12 times more likely to molest children than heterosexuals. Homosexual teachers are at least seven times more likely to molest a pupil. Homosexual teachers are estimated to have committed at least 25 percent of pupil molestation; 40 percent of molestation assaults were made by those who engage in homosexuality.”

This is the claim that you make in your book that exactly feeds these folks who want to execute people for being gay, what they need in order to justify that. Do you stand by what you said in your book?

COHEN: Actually, you know, that one particular quote, when I do republish it, reprint it, we will extract that from it, because we don‘t want such things to be used against homosexual persons.

MADDOW: That quote is cited – you cite somebody named Paul Cameron as the source of that book.

COHEN: I see that they‘re using it, but you took that one little quote out of a 300-page book.

“you took that one little quote out of a 300-page book”

That “one little quote” may be edited out of Cohen’s next revision, but it’s a paltry excision in light of the other “little” quotes in his book.
Read more…

Randy Thomas, Vice President of Exodus International:

Freedom of speech which expresses a difference of opinion on morality and spirituality is not a crime.

The following is a case of one of the hackneyed headless monsters that the anti-gay industry loves to trot out, especially in regard to hate crime legislation that includes protections for minorities on the basis of sexual-orientation and gender identity.

In an article on the EI blog called “Canadian Decision Protects Freedom of Speech For Religious Views,” Mr. Thomas links to another article titling “Alberta judge rules anti-gay letter not hate speech, overturns ruling”:

A Court of Queen’s Bench judge has ruled an anti-gay letter written by a former Alberta pastor in 2002 was not a hate crime and is allowed under freedom of speech.

Justice E.C. Wilson overturned a 2008 ruling by the Alberta [Canada] Human Rights Commission that the letter by Stephen Boissoin that was published in the Red Deer Advocate broke provincial law.

Mr. Thomas then had this to say:

The step backwards came when freedom of speech was taken away by the oppressive will of the government through the Alberta Human Rights Commission.

Alberta Human Rights Commission:

Discrimination re: publications, notices
3 (1) No person shall publish, issue or display or cause to be published, issued or displayed before the public any statement, publication, notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that:

(a) indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate against a person or a class of persons, or

(b) is likely to expose a person or a class of persons to hatred or contempt…

The reasoning goes; since it happened in Canada, it will can happen here. Except for the fact that Canada does not have the First Amendment which protects religious hate-speech from interference by the U.S. government. (Westboro Baptist Church, anyone?)

Despite the absence of this protection in Canada, their judicial system sided in favor of Mr. Boissoin. Ergo, even their system worked in favor of free-speech.

One of the things Mr. Thomas, et al, neglects to mention, is that Egale Canada (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere) refused to take up the case against Reverend Boissoin:

We believe that sunshine is the best disinfectant.

I concur. The suppression of hate-speech does not solve the root of the problem—the climate that allows for hate-speech to flourish.

But let’s take a look at the example Mr. Thomas chooses to defend free-speech with on a moral level.

Here is the full text of Stephen Boissoin’s letter to the Red Deer Advocate that Mr. Thomas describes as  ”provocative”:
Read more…

Exodus Vice President Randy Thomas wrote an article titled “Grace and Gay Men” that recently appeared in the Focus on the Family webzine Boundless. While doing my best to read it with an unbiased eye, I’ll admit that Randy’s erratic blogging and commenting behavior make that difficult. For whatever reason, the man wipes out his entire blogging history on a repeated and regular basis (which makes accountability for past statements nearly impossible).

Also, it has been my experience that Randy is incapable of allowing for or conducting any open and honest discussion with people who disagree with him. Whether he is willing to admit it or not, those sorts of behaviors take away from the credibility of his content and portray him as disingenuous when he talks about loving homosexuals as Jesus would.

The article is prefaced by a disclaimer that is almost long enough to be a piece on its own. I understand the need for a disclaimer now and then, but Randy writes three paragraphs justifying what he is about to say. Number one, someone important at Exodus can attest to how distraught he has been while writing; second, he has thrown caution to the wind against the good advice of a friend who fears he will be perceived as pro-gay; last, gay men are dying of AIDS so it’s time to toughen up and be forthright about how much he cares about all the gay men dying while headed straight for hell. In my opinion, the long disclaimer, just like Randy’s web etiquette, detracts from the sincerity and impact of the entire piece.

Following the disclaimer, there is a sort of mini-essay in which Randy addresses the Body of Christ and its reluctance to demonstrate love and grace to gay men during the initial days of the AIDS pandemic.

I did not and do not think it is appropriate to stigmatize a large group of men whom the Lord loves, dismissing them as unworthy of our love.

And,

Even today, the overarching consistent message coming from the Christian community has been one of stigmatization and warning.

Randy goes on to write an article about gay men that’s full of stigmatization and warning, spending a fair amount of print convincing the reader of his own depravity in the late 80s. It strikes me as suspect when he talks about friends seeming to drop dead during that time frame with no knowledge of what was killing them. This was 1988. Read more…

ABC’s 20/20 will be showing an updated version of an old theme; gaging how people view public displays of affection. This time the couples are gay and the reactions range from reasonable to overbearing.

The setting is NJ for lesbian wives and Alabama for a gay couple. Guess where the 911 call happens.

Tonight at 10pm ET.

The recent hateful rant by Representative Sally Kern hit home with me, not because of the more widespread comparison she made between gay folks and terrorists, disgusting as it is, but because of her continued rant about the public schools “indoctrinating” children as young as two years old with “the homosexual lifestyle is an acceptable lifestyle.” As a 19-year veteran public school teacher, and an Oklahoma educator at that, where do I begin?

First of all, I’d like to let Representative Kern know that even though I contribute voluntarily to a pro-gay site, I’ve yet to receive my official copy of “the homosexual agenda.” Does that thing come in the mail? If so, mine is lost and I can scarcely think or conduct myself regarding these issues without such a document. In all seriousness, I’m not naive enough to say that I don’t operate from an agenda. Anyone with a couple of synapses making connections does, in fact, function based on one. I like to think of mine as a “love your neighbor as yourself” agenda. I do not base my agenda on sexuality, gay or straight, and the educators I know, even the ones who teach two-year-olds, are with me on that.

I’d venture to say that every public school in our country, and likely some private schools, are now teaching some form of character education. This has to be what Representative Kern is referring to in her rant because I know of no other curriculum that is widespread and could even begin to hint at the “indoctrination” to which she repeatedly refers. A simple search reveals that character ed programs are as prevalent in today’s schools as the soybean burger, though hopefully more tastefully produced. Read more…