Ex-Gay Ministries: Truth and Damages

[3113]

I presume I'm preaching to the choir with this video, but I thought it might be good to post it for those who wonder what kind of residual psychological damage ex-gay ministries are doing--and if there's any counter movements against them. It's a relief to see that there are people, once part of such ministries, now arguing and fighting against them.

It should come as no surprise, as well, that the real purpose behind such movements isn't so much to help gays "get better," but to push anti-gay political agendas.

In God We Trusted

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I presume I'm preaching to the choir with this video, but I thought it might be good to post it for those who wonder what kind of residual psychological damage ex-gay ministries are doing--and if there's any counter movements against them. It's a relief to see that there are people, once part of such ministries, now arguing and fighting against them.

It should come as no surprise, as well, that the real purpose behind such movements isn't so much to help gays "get better," but to push anti-gay political agendas.

In God We Trusted

Well, yeah. What else would anyone expect?

I mean, how can you 'get better' when there's nothing wrong with you? Find a smarter church. Lots of them don't feel that way. It's this sort of narrow-mindedness that makes me believe Prop 8 violates the First Amendment. I know of several denominations that have no trouble with same-sex unions. Being forbidden to officiate over such is forcing a Fundamentalist dogma as state policy. Illegal, say I.

 

[Carnevil9]

So if someone is gay, but wants to stop being gay, you would deny them the right to try to change?

 

[Stella_Omega]

So if someone is gay, but wants to stop being gay, you would deny them the right to try to change?

Certainly not, as long as that is their genuine choice. And conversely, if someone is hetero, and terribly ashamed of being hetero, I think we ought to support them in their efforts to become gay in any way we can.

 

[Edward Teach]

Certainly not, as long as that is their genuine choice. And conversely, if someone is hetero, and terribly ashamed of being hetero, I think we ought to support them in their efforts, in any way we can.

And if some dumbass preacher is a homophobe who attacks young gays, like my 17 yr old grandson, and is ashamed of being a homophobe and tries to pretend he is not, then I think we should support him by letting him sit on a rail so the tar and feathers won't chap his sorry ass as we haul him out of town.

Edward the Tolerant

 

[Guest]

To my knowledge, there is absolutely no credible evidence that core sexual identity and orientation can be changed, willingly or otherwise.

There is, however, a growing body of evidence that homosexuality is rooted in physiological differences, whether genetically, congenitaly, or environmentally caused. The evidence isn't yet incontrovertible, but for anyone who reviews it objectively, it's compelling.

Whether it's actually possible to change sexual orientation is a question for science to resolve, not religion... if you could actually get such an experimental protocol approved. I have little doubt that the dangers and ethical violations of such a proposal would result in it getting the swift boot, and deservedly so. Imagine the uproar if researchers proposed to help people change their racial identities.

One of the greatest dangers inherent in organized religion, to my thinking, is the directive to go out and convert the unbelievers to "save them from sin."

 

[rgraham666]

Backwoods America needs an enemy.

Gays have been elected for that position.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

What backwoods America doesnt like is the politicizing of sexuality.

I recently read a book about a man's quest to discover his roots. The book is excellent, by the way, but the author is gay and he injects his sexual orientation, his "gay-dar," (his words) to speculate about his ancestors' sexuality. He concedes he has no facts to warrant his conclusions, but they WERE cute and dressed nice etc. and he's almost certain a few of them were gay. He just knows!

Please!!! Stop with the constant I'M QUEER AND I'M HERE drum beating.

 

[3113]

Backwoods America needs an enemy.

Gays have been elected for that position.

I think "drafted" is more like it, because they've got no choice. It's either fight 'em or lose their rights and maybe their lives. And what has been infuriating me most of all is the way so many Americans blithely let them take on the fight, as if it's never going to affect their American way of life anyway, so why bother?

It's an old story. Take on a minority that few people are going to care about and use them to weasel your way into changing laws, little by little. Because you know that the majority is just going to shrug so long as what they're doing only affects that minority and not them.

 

[rgraham666]

I think "drafted" is more like it, because they've got no choice. It's either fight 'em or lose their rights and maybe their lives. And what has been infuriating me most of all is the way so many Americans blithely let them take on the fight, as if it's never going to affect their American way of life anyway, so why bother?

It's an old story. Take on a minority that few people are going to care about and use them to weasel your way into changing laws, little by little. Because you know that the majority is just going to shrug so long as what they're doing only affects that minority and not them.

I wonder if there's someway we can put it in monetary terms?

If there's one way to make people care about something it's to hit them in their wallets.

 

[3113]

If there's one way to make people care about something it's to hit them in their wallets.

Well, that's the way Bush got away with the Iraq war. He used a credit card and borrowed the money for it rather than taxing Americans for it. If he'd said, "We're going to war in Iraq and taking money out of everyone's paycheck each month to finance it--" you can imagine how short that war would have been.

It also helped that so many people wrongly assumed (and I think were allowed to assumed) that Iraq oil would help pay for it. Now we're trillions in debt and everyone's scratching their heads saying, "you mean we've gotta pay for it?"

 

[rgraham666]

It's one of the great conundrums of North America. They forget that there is two different meanings of 'free'.

One is political freedom, and has a cost.

One is 'something for nothing'.

A lot of people think they mean the same thing.

 

[Stella_Omega]

To my knowledge, there is absolutely no credible evidence that core sexual identity and orientation can be changed, willingly or otherwise.

There is, however, a growing body of evidence that homosexuality is rooted in physiological differences, whether genetically, congenitaly, or environmentally caused. The evidence isn't yet incontrovertible, but for anyone who reviews it objectively, it's compelling.

Whether it's actually possible to change sexual orientation is a question for science to resolve, not religion... if you could actually get such an experimental protocol approved. I have little doubt that the dangers and ethical violations of such a proposal would result in it getting the swift boot, and deservedly so. Imagine the uproar if researchers proposed to help people change their racial identities.

One of the greatest dangers inherent in organized religion, to my thinking, is the directive to go out and convert the unbelievers to "save them from sin."

Oh yeah, and I bet carney knows all of this just as well as you and I do.

 

[Stella_Omega]

It's one of the great conundrums of North America. They forget that there is two different meanings of 'free'.

One is political freedom, and has a cost.

One is 'something for nothing'.

A lot of people think they mean the same thing.

That's so well put, Rob, and I'm going to quote your words, quite often.

 

[rgraham666]

It's not my idea, Stella. I first read about the idea in The Doubter's Companion: A Dictionary of Aggressive Common Sense.

You should get a copy. It's one hell of a book.

 

[sadangel]

So if someone is gay, but wants to stop being gay, you would deny them the right to try to change?

No, I wouldn't deny them the right to change, if it's there own choice. However, being gay is not, nor has it ever been a choice. I did not choose to be a lesbian, I did however choose when I revealed it; after admitting it to myself. Just as I have not chosen to be bisexual, which has come to light after much self-examination and a long inner battle to accept this, more than 2 years of simply struggling with it. Accepting I was lesbian was far easier, and far easier to tell, this is not. I have chosen to reveal it, little by little on a mostly need to know basis. It's not easy, and I run many risks in revealing it.

Backwoods America needs an enemy.

Gays have been elected for that position.

I hate to admit, you are right. I mean, gays destroy the sanctity of marriage. (begin sarcasm)You know, how all hetero's stay married until death do they part, they all have children, and not one father or mother that is straight would EVER abuse their own children, in any manner, especially sexually. That's the sanctity of marriage that gays are destroying. (end sarcasm)

[

I think "drafted" is more like it, because they've got no choice. It's either fight 'em or lose their rights and maybe their lives. And what has been infuriating me most of all is the way so many Americans blithely let them take on the fight, as if it's never going to affect their American way of life anyway, so why bother?

It's an old story. Take on a minority that few people are going to care about and use them to weasel your way into changing laws, little by little. Because you know that the majority is just going to shrug so long as what they're doing only affects that minority and not them.

Just gonna say, yeah I agree. Most people go along blithely, mired in their own sludge, not realizing that there are others who are drowning beneath them. It doesn't affect them, that someone else is being affected, they only see how they are affected, and if they're not, then why worry.

I know better than to involve myself in these discussions. I usually avoid them on any site I'm at, but most of the one's I go to are predominately GLBT people, with a more "Christian" slant to the arguments. Just had to respond to some of the posts, some, most I agreed with, some I did not.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yeah well, sadangel, This forum has its share of fuckwits-- no one knows why they bother, but they exercise their Internet rights to be fucked as they can be.

 

[bunnylicker]

What an interesting video.. I'd read previously about the Beyond Ex-Gay group, as part of my studies on gender + sexuality. It's good to see that some of the former leaders of Ex-Gay have come to understand that they were wrong, and that they've caused such damage to people's lives.

In Australia the church is less influential, and coming from a non-religious background, I can't imagine what it's like to be treated that way. I've never felt that I've had anything to be ashamed of about my sexuality. I sympathize for victims of the Ex-Gay movement, and for people of GLBT orientation who've questioned or repressed their sexuality because of their religion.

 

[bunnylicker]

So if someone is gay, but wants to stop being gay, you would deny them the right to try to change?

gay people don't "stop being gay". that's the point.......

 

[xssve]

Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture Right wing moralizers are hindered by their propensity to attribute everything to "character".

 

[Vermilion]

I feel sickened by watching that. The difference between American society and UK society seems so much greater to me after watching something like that. I honestly find it difficult to take in.

 

[Gi_Venus]

So if someone is gay, but wants to stop being gay, you would deny them the right to try to change?

lol oooo you are funny if you are gay you cannot change. You are gay. Just like I am a transsexual, I cannot not be anything else other than try to right the body mind dissonance. I know post mordem studies of transsexuals shows that indeed we have the brain of the opposite sex. That it is a congenital thing. I believe a similar study shows that gays are quite likely similar in that it is a congenital characteristic. Now one can help someone deny what they are. How much sense is that? Now in all fairness there is sexual addiction where in all types of behaviors are manifested but the individual will know on introspective study.

 

[Gi_Venus]

Certainly not, as long as that is their genuine choice. And conversely, if someone is hetero, and terribly ashamed of being hetero, I think we ought to support them in their efforts to become gay in any way we can.

*giggle* an undeniable logic Stella.

 

[Stella_Omega]

*giggle* an undeniable logic Stella.

Carney's question is reductive and simplified-- idiot-ified, even. The answers are complex and in many cases impossible to arrive at a definitive solution.

For right-wingers, asking a question like that means they've "won." Where they get that notion, I don't *coffLimbaughcoff* know.

 

[rgraham666]

I believe it was Ronald Reagan who said, "If I say something ten times it's the truth."

How much truer must something be if you say it one hundred times at the top of your lungs.