I remember Ed and his book from my "ex-gay" days.  But I haven't
heard anything about him in years.

--- In exexgayministry@y..., calldon2k <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Anyone know of a guy named Ed Hurst?  He wrote a booklet
> called "Putting The Axe To The Roots" in which he named the
standard
> things...rejection, low self-esteem, etc.  I met him around 22
years
> ago.  Five years (or so) later, I heard him interviewed on a radio
> program.  Now...his writings are still being promoted but HE has
> dropped out of sight!  Last I could find, he was living someplace
in
> the northeast but not promoting the ex-gay "hustle" anymore.
>
> Funny how they all drop to the side but ex-gay ministries still
use
> their writings as though they are true!
>
> Has anyone heard of Ed Hurst lately?

Hello;

I'm doing some research on ex-gay ministries and reparative therapy
programs.  I'm interested in objectively verifiable stuff about the
programs, and I'd really appreciate any direction or help anybody can
provide.

By way of background, I'm a 36 y.o. lawyer and I've recently started
doing gay rights work.  I was raised Baptist, which made me
absolutely miserable when I was a kid realizing that I was gay.  I
came out when I was 19 years old.  While I was in college I joined
the Episcopal church and realized that faith didn't have to be a
source of pain and misery for gay kids.  I've been partnered for six
years.  I'm also a huge comic book geek, in case anybody cares about
silly stuff like that.

Anyway, what I'm looking for is:

1) Specific misrepresentations made by ex-gay programs – anything
like misrepresentations about what "change" means or
misrepresentations about their success rates.

2) Stories about anybody who has been placed in conversion therapy
against his or her will by parents or a state agency, hospital or
foster care program.

3) Any information regarding the ex-gay programs' refusal to
participate in scientific studies that could confirm or deny the
impact of their therapy on sexual attraction (sexual attraction in
men is measurable – any "ex-gay" male who gets a woodie while
watching "Gladiator" isn't all that "ex").

4) Specific instances of people committing suicide or otherwise
harming themselves while under the care of ex-gay ministries or
conversion therapy practitioners.

If anybody cares about my personal position on the matter, I have no
problem with people of faith seeking out resources to deal with their
sexuality, and I have no problem with programs that attempt to change
people from gay to straight and are honest about the almost total
failure rate of such attempts.  I have a big problem with forcing
anybody into unproven and unscientific modes of therapy, and I have a
big problem with advocates of "change" who refuse to allow scientific
testing to determine whether or not such "change" actually takes
place.  I'd like to objectively prove that the promoters of ex-gay
ministries refuse to allow objective testing of sexual response among
patients and that they lie about their alleged success rates.

Needless to say, you're going to get all kinds of feedback on this.
As a gay man (and an ex-ex-gay, for lack of better term) I've
followed the "ex-gay" movement pretty closely for 20 years.  As a
result of the multitude of defections, the strategy of Exodus and
other "ex-gay" groups appears to have changed dramatically over the
years.  Rather than emphasize heterosexuality as a goal, most "ex-
gay" ministries now simply push a cessation of homosexual activity.
Even the former Exodus North American director Bob Davies himself, in
the aftermath of "ex-gay" poster boy John Paulk having been caught in
a gar bar (and then adding insult to injury by lying about it),
announced in an Exodus press release: "I believe that as an
organization we need to re-examine other issues [including] our use
of terms such as 'healing' and 'change.'  He may as well just have
said, "Perhaps our mouths are writing checks our ministries can't
cash."

Another significant change I've noticed is that while many "ex-gay"
groups used to run by people who were "formally" gay, now an
increasing number of the ministries are run by people who were never
gay -- often married couples.   The change is pretty indicative of
their dismal success rate as gay people (or "ex-gays") eventually
come to the realization that a change in behavior does not translate
into a change in orientation.

With regard to gay studies, you may recall the Spitzer study that
received a good deal of national attention some time ago by
claiming "gays can change."  I personally responded to an ad Dr.
Spitzer placed eliciting testimonies from people who had been
involved in "ex-gay" ministry when this study was conducted.  I went
through a preliminary telephone interview with one of Dr. Spitzer's
associates where it was decided my background was exactly what they
were looking for regarding participation in the study.  During my
telephone interview with Dr. Spitzer, however, he disqualified me
from participating in his study after learning I did not believe
reparative therapy worked.  Dr. Spitzer explained he was "LOOKING TO
SPEAK WITH PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THAT GAYS CAN CHANGE."  If others who
answered his ad were disqualified from participating on the same
grounds, one need not be a rocket scientist to figure out how Dr.
Spitzer reached the conclusion he did.

Of course the "ex-gay" groups and their supporters never acknowledged
that both the media and his peers blasted the study charging he
misrepresented his research and distorted his findings.  The American
Psychiatric Association denounced the study at their annual meeting
and noted the research was based on a scientifically insignificant
sample of 200.  A multitude of other flaws were also pointed out
including: the study was not submitted for peer review, a fundamental
prerequisite for the credibility of any study.  Spitzer also based
his findings solely on 45-minute telephone interviews with his
participants, hardly a basis for reliable data.  Convenient sample
and the question of a 45-minute phone interview, without other
verification can not determine that a person has changed
orientation.  He also had no proof whatsoever whether participants
were honest.  Consider too the one group that lauded his results was
NARTH, the organization that sponsored the study -- Hello!!??

Your quip about "any ex-gays who get a woodie while watching
Gladiator," reminded me of the following quote from Dr. Tony
Campolo.  As you may know, he is an ordained minister, the best-
selling author of over 25 books on Christian living and a
sociologist, by trade.  He got into the analysis of homosexuality and
gay people back when he was a faculty member at the University of
Pennsylvania.  This quote is from the transcript of a talk he gave
with his wife, Peggy:

"I interviewed significant numbers of homosexuals who, quote unquote,
claim to be cures. And I asked them a simple question.  Here's the
question: Do you ever have sexual fantasies? Now, everybody in this
group … has sexual fantasies.  Everybody here has sexual fantasies,
you see.  As a matter of fact, before this program is over, according
to, to one study, the average male in this group will have three
sexual fantasies. … The truth is I asked the question of all my
homosexuals that I interview and here it is: When you fantasize do
you fantasize homosexually or heterosexually? I always get the same
answer. We fantasize homosexually. Well, how can you say that you're
no longer in a homosexual orientation?"

You may have also uncovered the very interesting and thought-
provoking article titled "Gay No More?" centering on "ex-gay"
ministries and reparative therapies that originally appeared in the
March 1999 issue of Psychology Today.  The author interviewed a wide
variety of people and the article includes insights from both sides
of the argument.  It attempts to address such fundamental questions
as: What is the nature of sexual orientation and is it mutable?  Who
are the people who seek to change their orientations?  What drives
someone to seek a "conversion?" And the biggie: Are gay people truly
shedding their same-sex attractions?  Or do they continue to struggle
against their natural impulses, accepting celibacy or marriage as a
socially-sanctioned substitute, and thereby are really saying: "I am
now more acceptable to myself and to the people around me?"  The link
is: http://www.findarticles.com/m1175/2_32/53985474/p1/article.jhtml

There's lots more good stuff out there.  Hope some of this stuff
helps you with your study.

--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Tenzil42" <lawyerbrianc@h...> wrote:
> Hello;
>
> I'm doing some research on ex-gay ministries and reparative therapy
> programs.  I'm interested in objectively verifiable stuff about the
> programs, and I'd really appreciate any direction or help anybody
can
> provide.
>
> By way of background, I'm a 36 y.o. lawyer and I've recently
started
> doing gay rights work.  I was raised Baptist, which made me
> absolutely miserable when I was a kid realizing that I was gay.  I
> came out when I was 19 years old.  While I was in college I joined
> the Episcopal church and realized that faith didn't have to be a
> source of pain and misery for gay kids.  I've been partnered for
six
> years.  I'm also a huge comic book geek, in case anybody cares
about
> silly stuff like that.
>
> Anyway, what I'm looking for is:
>
> 1) Specific misrepresentations made by ex-gay programs – anything
> like misrepresentations about what "change" means or
> misrepresentations about their success rates.
>
> 2) Stories about anybody who has been placed in conversion therapy
> against his or her will by parents or a state agency, hospital or
> foster care program.
>
> 3) Any information regarding the ex-gay programs' refusal to
> participate in scientific studies that could confirm or deny the
> impact of their therapy on sexual attraction (sexual attraction in
> men is measurable – any "ex-gay" male who gets a woodie while
> watching "Gladiator" isn't all that "ex").
>
> 4) Specific instances of people committing suicide or otherwise
> harming themselves while under the care of ex-gay ministries or
> conversion therapy practitioners.
>
> If anybody cares about my personal position on the matter, I have
no
> problem with people of faith seeking out resources to deal with
their
> sexuality, and I have no problem with programs that attempt to
change
> people from gay to straight and are honest about the almost total
> failure rate of such attempts.  I have a big problem with forcing
> anybody into unproven and unscientific modes of therapy, and I have
a
> big problem with advocates of "change" who refuse to allow
scientific
> testing to determine whether or not such "change" actually takes
> place.  I'd like to objectively prove that the promoters of ex-gay
> ministries refuse to allow objective testing of sexual response
among
> patients and that they lie about their alleged success rates.

Off-hand, I can't think of any ex-gay statements that were not
covered by a disclaimer.  The ex-gay program I was in was very
careful to note that they their program was voluntary and they did
NOT guarantee to turn gays straight.  I suspect that these
ministries know that most of their participants will drop-out and
are therefore they have become very diligent about not publishing
any 'incriminating' claims.

One misrepresentation I feel these ministries make is they present
themselves as providing a counseling services, such as charging
hourly counseling session rates and even trying to advertise
themselves as professional counseling service without specifying
their religious affiliation or reparative therapy.  It seems to me
that usually these ministries are staffed by amateur 'counselor' who
have very little training.  And yet these 'counselors' are expected
to administer reparative therapy which often involves poking into
participants supposed roots.

Good luck on your search.  I wish I could be of more help.

Norm!

Norm, where the heck have been all this time??!!  Your services as
moderator of this group were solely needed and repeatedly asked for
but you were nowhere to be found.  What gives?


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Norm" <nojam75@y...> wrote:
> Off-hand, I can't think of any ex-gay statements that were not
> covered by a disclaimer.  The ex-gay program I was in was very
> careful to note that they their program was voluntary and they did
> NOT guarantee to turn gays straight.  I suspect that these
> ministries know that most of their participants will drop-out and
> are therefore they have become very diligent about not publishing
> any 'incriminating' claims.
>
> One misrepresentation I feel these ministries make is they present
> themselves as providing a counseling services, such as charging
> hourly counseling session rates and even trying to advertise
> themselves as professional counseling service without specifying
> their religious affiliation or reparative therapy.  It seems to me
> that usually these ministries are staffed by amateur 'counselor'
who
> have very little training.  And yet these 'counselors' are
expected
> to administer reparative therapy which often involves poking into
> participants supposed roots.
>
> Good luck on your search.  I wish I could be of more help.
>
> Norm!

I'm sorry, I have not been a very good moderator lately.  During
that last spurt of posting, I was relocating and didn't have time to
carefully read the posts.

If there are any problems again, feel free to e-mail me.

Norm!

--- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Norm, where the heck have been all this time??!!  Your services as
> moderator of this group were solely needed and repeatedly asked
for
> but you were nowhere to be found.  What gives?
>
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Norm" <nojam75@y...> wrote:
> > Off-hand, I can't think of any ex-gay statements that were not
> > covered by a disclaimer.  The ex-gay program I was in was very
> > careful to note that they their program was voluntary and they
did
> > NOT guarantee to turn gays straight.  I suspect that these
> > ministries know that most of their participants will drop-out
and
> > are therefore they have become very diligent about not
publishing
> > any 'incriminating' claims.
> >
> > One misrepresentation I feel these ministries make is they
present
> > themselves as providing a counseling services, such as charging
> > hourly counseling session rates and even trying to advertise
> > themselves as professional counseling service without specifying
> > their religious affiliation or reparative therapy.  It seems to
me
> > that usually these ministries are staffed by amateur 'counselor'
> who
> > have very little training.  And yet these 'counselors' are
> expected
> > to administer reparative therapy which often involves poking
into
> > participants supposed roots.
> >
> > Good luck on your search.  I wish I could be of more help.
> >
> > Norm!

Fitrst up, I shouldn't be here because I don't agree with the
expressed aims of the group.  However, I do think this research is a
good idea.  There are people offering "change" programs that need to
be weeded out.  It seems that you are starting with a negative
hypothesis and that's ok, as long as you objectively consider ALL of
the evidence.  I know that NARTH will not be a popular organisation
with members of this board, but you should at least consider what
they have to say before dismissing it.  Have a look at
http://www.narth.com/docs/barring.html   which is entitled: "Former
APA president condemns APA for barring research".  Will you consider
anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?  If you approach groups
running change programs (see Links on the Yahoo group discussion
Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you will get them ... then
of course you will need to verify them in some way.

In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict between
their sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the desired
change in their orientation.  However, if their choice is to follow
their faith instead of their sexual feelings, programs that provide
help in reduction or control of their behaviour and urges, are a
valid and useful resource.  I agree with you that ALL programs need
to be run professionally, and to be totally honest about what they
offer and what they have achieved.
Ken

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Ken.  You are right that most of
us here have a strong bias against the ex-gay movement.

I'm not sure what your NARTH reference regarding the American
Psychological Association was suppose to refute.  As I understand
it, the APA does not view homosexuality has something in need of
being changed; therefore, the APA has little interest in promoting
NARTH's views.

It seems to me that any serious study of ex-gay treatment(s) would
have to go beyond "anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies".  An
objective study would need to identify how effective the treatment
is in meeting it's objectives.  For whatever reason, Exodus and
other ex-gay ministries seem reluctant to study the effectiveness of
the treatment they advocate.

- Norm!

<<However, if their choice is to follow their faith instead of their
sexual feelings, programs that provide help in reduction or control
of their behaviour and urges, are a valid and useful resource.>>

It would appear you get yourself into trouble right at the get-go by
presuming the two are mutually exclusive.  Perhaps, homosexually-
oriented people, just like heterosexually-oriented people, need not
repent of their sexual orientation, but rather of their sinful
responses to them.  No one should engage in reckless self-indulgence
or socially and personally irresponsible behavior -- sexually or
otherwise.  And therefore, I'm all for programs that help people
live healthier and more responsibly with their sexuality as well as
in other areas of their lives.  And this can certainly encompass and
include a "reduction or control of their urges." But when a program
promotes and/or promises a change in sexual orientation, that's a
different matter altogether.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "armwa" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> Fitrst up, I shouldn't be here because I don't agree with the
> expressed aims of the group.  However, I do think this research is
a
> good idea.  There are people offering "change" programs that need
to
> be weeded out.  It seems that you are starting with a negative
> hypothesis and that's ok, as long as you objectively consider ALL
of
> the evidence.  I know that NARTH will not be a popular
organisation
> with members of this board, but you should at least consider what
> they have to say before dismissing it.  Have a look at
> http://www.narth.com/docs/barring.html   which is
entitled: "Former
> APA president condemns APA for barring research".  Will you
consider
> anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?  If you approach
groups
> running change programs (see Links on the Yahoo group discussion
> Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you will get them ...
then
> of course you will need to verify them in some way.
>
> In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict
between
> their sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the desired
> change in their orientation.  However, if their choice is to
follow
> their faith instead of their sexual feelings, programs that
provide
> help in reduction or control of their behaviour and urges, are a
> valid and useful resource.  I agree with you that ALL programs
need
> to be run professionally, and to be totally honest about what they
> offer and what they have achieved.
> Ken

Thanks for the responses.   This is getting very informative.  Nailing down
any specific representations by these ex-gay programs is like herding cats.
They all seem to speak in shaded, couched terms -- claiming to be successful
without ever giving any specifics that would prove success.

“Will you consider anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?”

No.  Sexual attraction is objectively testable, and therefore objective
evidence should be relied upon rather than subjective testimony.  Why take
people’s word for it when we can actually test their sexual responses and
see if they are telling the truth?

“If you approach groups running change programs (see Links on the Yahoo
group discussion Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you will get them
... then of course you will need to verify them in some way.”

I have asked several “ex-gays” if they would allow objective scientific
testing of their sexual attractions, and I’ve offered to be a test subject
myself (just to prove that I’m really, really, gay).  They uniformly refuse
to test the truthfulness of their claims, and one of them even compared me
to Dr. Mengele for even suggesting that their claims be tested.

This is strong evidence that these folks are well-intentioned liars.

“However, if their choice is to follow their faith instead of their sexual
feelings, programs that provide help in reduction or control of their
behavior and urges, are a valid and useful resource.”

I don’t have any problem with people who choose celibacy for religious
reasons, or with programs that claim to assist people in living a celibate
life.

I have problems with this “love won out” stuff that obviously promises to
change people’s sexual attractions (as opposed to sexual behavior).  I also
have programs that encourage gay people to enter straight marriages.

It’s all about honest.  Thus far, Focus on the Family, Exodus, NARTH and
Nicolosi have been about as dishonest as it gets.  They put out huge ads and
stories saying gay people can become straight, while refusing to allow
scientific testing of that claim.

“In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict between their
sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the desired change in their
orientation.”

Actually, according to the available data, you would be more honest if you
said “virtually all gay people” never achieve change, rather than “some” gay
people.  Minimizing the overwhelming failure rates of the “change” programs
is just one of the big lies these groups attempt to spread.

*sigh* == but it’s just so hard to get specifics because the ex-gay programs
all use weasely language like “some people” when the truth is that they are
referring to just about everybody.  They say they have experienced “change”
when they are still attracted to the same gender (note to NARTH – a guy who
fantasizes about Tom Cruise while trying to have sex with his wife is gay,
not ex-gay, just gay).

Although they claim to follow the Bible closely, the reparative therapy
movement seems more obsessed with petty rules of Leviticus than with the
Ninth Commandment.  I would like to ride these programs until they start
really telling the truth about what they offer.

“I'm not sure what your NARTH reference regarding the American Psychological
Association was suppose to refute. As I understand it, the APA does not view
homosexuality has something in need of
being changed; therefore, the APA has little interest in promoting NARTH's
views.”

It’s arguing against the APA’s position that reparative therapy is
unethical.  It’s complete hypocrisy on NARTH’s part.  They complain that the
APA is blocking research, when in fact its NARTH and EXODUS that have
refused to allow any objectively verifiable research relating to the before
and after sexual attractions of their victims (oops, patients).

“It seems to me that any serious study of ex-gay treatment(s) would have to
go beyond "anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies". An objective study
would need to identify how effective the treatment is in meeting it's
objectives. For whatever reason, Exodus and other ex-gay ministries seem
reluctant to study the effectiveness of the treatment they advocate.”

The penile plethysmograph is a fairly accurate way to study sexual response
in men, and the photoplethysmograph is a fairly accurate way to study sexual
response in women.  It’s not 100% accurate, but it’s good enough to
determine average sexual response in a large sample.  Testing a few hundred
people before “reparative therapy” and afterward would be an excellent
objective indication of whether or not “change” takes place.  The advocates
of “change” hate the very suggestion that their “testimonies” be challenge
by anything like objective scientific testing, so we don’t have any data on
the question except the “testimony” of people who are invested in the ex-gay
programs.

To me, the refusal of reparative therapy advocates to engage in objective
testing strongly indicates that they are a pack of liars.  The fact that
these people appear in full page newspaper ads saying they have become
“straight” is absolutely disgusting.  If you’ve changed, prove it.  If you
won’t prove it, shut up.



_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Although, your points are well taken and a plethysmograph used to
objectively measure their sexual attraction may sound good in
theory, it's pretty unrealistic to expect that any "ex-gays" would
ever subject themselves to such testing.

First of all, we have the undeniable fact that "change groups" (as
you call them) go to great lengths to hide their painfully dismal
success rate.  Secondly, many "ex-gays" have been imparted with
anything but healthy attitudes toward sex or their body parts as a
whole.  They're often made to feel their God-given "privates"
are "dirty," "sinful" or "shameful" and should, for the most part,
be kept in the dark and rarely even spoken about.  To coin an OT
phrase, they've been made to feel their body parts are "unclean" on
a level that the very Creator of these parts never intended --
despite the fact that many portions of the Bible are quite steamy.
(One man on the Yahoo "exgaymensminstry" board went so far as to
post to his cohorts that sexual desire -- both hetero and homo -- is
only a result of the Fall!!!  Is that sad or what?)

Thirdly, since plethysmographs are most often used to treat sex
offenders with aversion therapy which involves subjecting patients
to electric shocks or foul odors while being shown sexually
suggestive material, these machines have hardly acquired a friendly
reputation.  And perhaps most significantly, as I outlined and
illustrated in my earlier post (#2546), these groups are much less
concerned with truth, facts and evidence than they are pushing their
own agenda.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Brian Chase" <lawyerbrianc@h...> wrote:
> Thanks for the responses.   This is getting very informative.
Nailing down
> any specific representations by these ex-gay programs is like
herding cats.
> They all seem to speak in shaded, couched terms -- claiming to be
successful
> without ever giving any specifics that would prove success.
>
> "Will you consider anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?"
>
> No.  Sexual attraction is objectively testable, and therefore
objective
> evidence should be relied upon rather than subjective testimony.
Why take
> people's word for it when we can actually test their sexual
responses and
> see if they are telling the truth?
>
> "If you approach groups running change programs (see Links on the
Yahoo
> group discussion Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you will
get them
> ... then of course you will need to verify them in some way."
>
> I have asked several "ex-gays" if they would allow objective
scientific
> testing of their sexual attractions, and I've offered to be a test
subject
> myself (just to prove that I'm really, really, gay).  They
uniformly refuse
> to test the truthfulness of their claims, and one of them even
compared me
> to Dr. Mengele for even suggesting that their claims be tested.
>
> This is strong evidence that these folks are well-intentioned
liars.
>
> "However, if their choice is to follow their faith instead of
their sexual
> feelings, programs that provide help in reduction or control of
their
> behavior and urges, are a valid and useful resource."
>
> I don't have any problem with people who choose celibacy for
religious
> reasons, or with programs that claim to assist people in living a
celibate
> life.
>
> I have problems with this "love won out" stuff that obviously
promises to
> change people's sexual attractions (as opposed to sexual
behavior).  I also
> have programs that encourage gay people to enter straight
marriages.
>
> It's all about honest.  Thus far, Focus on the Family, Exodus,
NARTH and
> Nicolosi have been about as dishonest as it gets.  They put out
huge ads and
> stories saying gay people can become straight, while refusing to
allow
> scientific testing of that claim.
>
> "In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict
between their
> sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the desired change
in their
> orientation."
>
> Actually, according to the available data, you would be more
honest if you
> said "virtually all gay people" never achieve change, rather
than "some" gay
> people.  Minimizing the overwhelming failure rates of the "change"
programs
> is just one of the big lies these groups attempt to spread.
>
> *sigh* == but it's just so hard to get specifics because the ex-
gay programs
> all use weasely language like "some people" when the truth is that
they are
> referring to just about everybody.  They say they have
experienced "change"
> when they are still attracted to the same gender (note to NARTH –
a guy who
> fantasizes about Tom Cruise while trying to have sex with his wife
is gay,
> not ex-gay, just gay).
>
> Although they claim to follow the Bible closely, the reparative
therapy
> movement seems more obsessed with petty rules of Leviticus than
with the
> Ninth Commandment.  I would like to ride these programs until they
start
> really telling the truth about what they offer.
>
> "I'm not sure what your NARTH reference regarding the American
Psychological
> Association was suppose to refute. As I understand it, the APA
does not view
> homosexuality has something in need of
> being changed; therefore, the APA has little interest in promoting
NARTH's
> views."
>
> It's arguing against the APA's position that reparative therapy is
> unethical.  It's complete hypocrisy on NARTH's part.  They
complain that the
> APA is blocking research, when in fact its NARTH and EXODUS that
have
> refused to allow any objectively verifiable research relating to
the before
> and after sexual attractions of their victims (oops, patients).
>
> "It seems to me that any serious study of ex-gay treatment(s)
would have to
> go beyond "anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies". An
objective study
> would need to identify how effective the treatment is in meeting
it's
> objectives. For whatever reason, Exodus and other ex-gay
ministries seem
> reluctant to study the effectiveness of the treatment they
advocate."
>
> The penile plethysmograph is a fairly accurate way to study sexual
response
> in men, and the photoplethysmograph is a fairly accurate way to
study sexual
> response in women.  It's not 100% accurate, but it's good enough
to
> determine average sexual response in a large sample.  Testing a
few hundred
> people before "reparative therapy" and afterward would be an
excellent
> objective indication of whether or not "change" takes place.  The
advocates
> of "change" hate the very suggestion that their "testimonies" be
challenge
> by anything like objective scientific testing, so we don't have
any data on
> the question except the "testimony" of people who are invested in
the ex-gay
> programs.
>
> To me, the refusal of reparative therapy advocates to engage in
objective
> testing strongly indicates that they are a pack of liars.  The
fact that
> these people appear in full page newspaper ads saying they have
become
> "straight" is absolutely disgusting.  If you've changed, prove
it.  If you
> won't prove it, shut up.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

...and on a somewhat related note, despite my being a relatively
easy-going and tolerant kind of guy, I'm not sure how I'd feel about
having someone attach one of those things to my willie either!  :-)

--- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Although, your points are well taken and a plethysmograph used to
> objectively measure their sexual attraction may sound good in
> theory, it's pretty unrealistic to expect that any "ex-gays" would
> ever subject themselves to such testing.
>
> First of all, we have the undeniable fact that "change groups" (as
> you call them) go to great lengths to hide their painfully dismal
> success rate.  Secondly, many "ex-gays" have been imparted with
> anything but healthy attitudes toward sex or their body parts as a
> whole.  They're often made to feel their God-given "privates"
> are "dirty," "sinful" or "shameful" and should, for the most part,
> be kept in the dark and rarely even spoken about.  To coin an OT
> phrase, they've been made to feel their body parts are "unclean"
on
> a level that the very Creator of these parts never intended --
> despite the fact that many portions of the Bible are quite
steamy.
> (One man on the Yahoo "exgaymensminstry" board went so far as to
> post to his cohorts that sexual desire -- both hetero and homo --
is
> only a result of the Fall!!!  Is that sad or what?)
>
> Thirdly, since plethysmographs are most often used to treat sex
> offenders with aversion therapy which involves subjecting patients
> to electric shocks or foul odors while being shown sexually
> suggestive material, these machines have hardly acquired a
friendly
> reputation.  And perhaps most significantly, as I outlined and
> illustrated in my earlier post (#2546), these groups are much less
> concerned with truth, facts and evidence than they are pushing
their
> own agenda.
>
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Brian Chase" <lawyerbrianc@h...>
wrote:
> > Thanks for the responses.   This is getting very informative.
> Nailing down
> > any specific representations by these ex-gay programs is like
> herding cats.
> > They all seem to speak in shaded, couched terms -- claiming to
be
> successful
> > without ever giving any specifics that would prove success.
> >
> > "Will you consider anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?"
> >
> > No.  Sexual attraction is objectively testable, and therefore
> objective
> > evidence should be relied upon rather than subjective
testimony.
> Why take
> > people's word for it when we can actually test their sexual
> responses and
> > see if they are telling the truth?
> >
> > "If you approach groups running change programs (see Links on
the
> Yahoo
> > group discussion Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you
will
> get them
> > ... then of course you will need to verify them in some way."
> >
> > I have asked several "ex-gays" if they would allow objective
> scientific
> > testing of their sexual attractions, and I've offered to be a
test
> subject
> > myself (just to prove that I'm really, really, gay).  They
> uniformly refuse
> > to test the truthfulness of their claims, and one of them even
> compared me
> > to Dr. Mengele for even suggesting that their claims be tested.
> >
> > This is strong evidence that these folks are well-intentioned
> liars.
> >
> > "However, if their choice is to follow their faith instead of
> their sexual
> > feelings, programs that provide help in reduction or control of
> their
> > behavior and urges, are a valid and useful resource."
> >
> > I don't have any problem with people who choose celibacy for
> religious
> > reasons, or with programs that claim to assist people in living
a
> celibate
> > life.
> >
> > I have problems with this "love won out" stuff that obviously
> promises to
> > change people's sexual attractions (as opposed to sexual
> behavior).  I also
> > have programs that encourage gay people to enter straight
> marriages.
> >
> > It's all about honest.  Thus far, Focus on the Family, Exodus,
> NARTH and
> > Nicolosi have been about as dishonest as it gets.  They put out
> huge ads and
> > stories saying gay people can become straight, while refusing to
> allow
> > scientific testing of that claim.
> >
> > "In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict
> between their
> > sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the desired change
> in their
> > orientation."
> >
> > Actually, according to the available data, you would be more
> honest if you
> > said "virtually all gay people" never achieve change, rather
> than "some" gay
> > people.  Minimizing the overwhelming failure rates of
the "change"
> programs
> > is just one of the big lies these groups attempt to spread.
> >
> > *sigh* == but it's just so hard to get specifics because the ex-
> gay programs
> > all use weasely language like "some people" when the truth is
that
> they are
> > referring to just about everybody.  They say they have
> experienced "change"
> > when they are still attracted to the same gender (note to NARTH –

> a guy who
> > fantasizes about Tom Cruise while trying to have sex with his
wife
> is gay,
> > not ex-gay, just gay).
> >
> > Although they claim to follow the Bible closely, the reparative
> therapy
> > movement seems more obsessed with petty rules of Leviticus than
> with the
> > Ninth Commandment.  I would like to ride these programs until
they
> start
> > really telling the truth about what they offer.
> >
> > "I'm not sure what your NARTH reference regarding the American
> Psychological
> > Association was suppose to refute. As I understand it, the APA
> does not view
> > homosexuality has something in need of
> > being changed; therefore, the APA has little interest in
promoting
> NARTH's
> > views."
> >
> > It's arguing against the APA's position that reparative therapy
is
> > unethical.  It's complete hypocrisy on NARTH's part.  They
> complain that the
> > APA is blocking research, when in fact its NARTH and EXODUS that
> have
> > refused to allow any objectively verifiable research relating to
> the before
> > and after sexual attractions of their victims (oops, patients).
> >
> > "It seems to me that any serious study of ex-gay treatment(s)
> would have to
> > go beyond "anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies". An
> objective study
> > would need to identify how effective the treatment is in meeting
> it's
> > objectives. For whatever reason, Exodus and other ex-gay
> ministries seem
> > reluctant to study the effectiveness of the treatment they
> advocate."
> >
> > The penile plethysmograph is a fairly accurate way to study
sexual
> response
> > in men, and the photoplethysmograph is a fairly accurate way to
> study sexual
> > response in women.  It's not 100% accurate, but it's good enough
> to
> > determine average sexual response in a large sample.  Testing a
> few hundred
> > people before "reparative therapy" and afterward would be an
> excellent
> > objective indication of whether or not "change" takes place.
The
> advocates
> > of "change" hate the very suggestion that their "testimonies" be
> challenge
> > by anything like objective scientific testing, so we don't have
> any data on
> > the question except the "testimony" of people who are invested
in
> the ex-gay
> > programs.
> >
> > To me, the refusal of reparative therapy advocates to engage in
> objective
> > testing strongly indicates that they are a pack of liars.  The
> fact that
> > these people appear in full page newspaper ads saying they have
> become
> > "straight" is absolutely disgusting.  If you've changed, prove
> it.  If you
> > won't prove it, shut up.
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

I know what nyguy means -- I wouldn't be too enthused about being hitched up
to a woodie-meter either, but I'd do it for the cause of truth, justice and
making fun of people who make outrageous claims.  If these programs can't
manage to scrape up a few hundred volunteers to prove their claims, then
they should be universally condemned as liars. (or at least universally
ridiculed, which is more fun). -- Of course the big problem is how to
ridicule and expose the programs without harming the participants, who are
often well meaning people suffering from increadible pain (rejection by
church, rejection by family, rejection by the gay community -- not good).

But anyway, people who volunteer to be in full page ads in newspapers
touting their new heterosexual lives can't exactly argue that they have
privacy concerns when it comes to their pee-pees and such.  It's funny how
people like John Paulk can be totally lurid and candid when it comes to
"testifying" about his former sinful ways, but suddenly he's all about
privacy concerns when it comes to his current dubious claim of
heterosexuality.

Oh well, I really do appreciate everybody's help.  Eventually I think there
will be a case challenging the claims of repairative therapy in court -- and
I wanna be there.  People should have every right to seek whatever therapy
they want, but the therapists have a duty to be honest about what they are
providing and what the chances of "success" are.  I want these programs held
to the same standard that any other provider of counseling services would be
held (if a drug rehab program took out "change is possible" ads in
newspapers without mentioning that they had a 99% failure rate, they would
get their asses sued off, and rightly so).

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

There was a big uproar within the conservative Christian community
when the doctor, who had helped to have homosexuality removed from
the list of APA disorders, anounced research that some gays can
change if they were highly motivated.  To my knowledge the way that
research was conducted was by extensive phone and face interviews.  A
questinare is only as good as it's answers.  I have a number of
friends who testify every day that they are exgay but one thing that
I have noticed is that although they are in relationships with women
and many have married and started families, they are still attracted
to men.  Now exodus usually says that those temptations are because
of gender idenity crises or whatever, and that they may never go
away.  Another thing that I have realized is that many of the exgay
people that I talk to tell me that they are only attracted to their
wives not to women in general, yet they are still heavily attracted
to men(plural).
I have been in and out of exodus ministries since 1997, mostly
because of trying to come to terms with my Christianity.  I have been
in therapy, exorcisms (when in bible college in late '80s), healing
of memories, learning my identity in Christ, New Directions (similar
to Living Waters), Exodus conferences, and who knows what else.  I am
just as attracted to men now as ever before, if not more so, LOL.
Anyhow, this is my two cents on the topic.

David



-- In exexgayministry@y..., "Tenzil42" <lawyerbrianc@h...> wrote:
> Hello;
>
> I'm doing some research on ex-gay ministries and reparative therapy
> programs.  I'm interested in objectively verifiable stuff about the
> programs, and I'd really appreciate any direction or help anybody
can
> provide.
>
> By way of background, I'm a 36 y.o. lawyer and I've recently
started
> doing gay rights work.  I was raised Baptist, which made me
> absolutely miserable when I was a kid realizing that I was gay.  I
> came out when I was 19 years old.  While I was in college I joined
> the Episcopal church and realized that faith didn't have to be a
> source of pain and misery for gay kids.  I've been partnered for
six
> years.  I'm also a huge comic book geek, in case anybody cares
about
> silly stuff like that.
>
> Anyway, what I'm looking for is:
>
> 1) Specific misrepresentations made by ex-gay programs – anything
> like misrepresentations about what "change" means or
> misrepresentations about their success rates.
>
> 2) Stories about anybody who has been placed in conversion therapy
> against his or her will by parents or a state agency, hospital or
> foster care program.
>
> 3) Any information regarding the ex-gay programs' refusal to
> participate in scientific studies that could confirm or deny the
> impact of their therapy on sexual attraction (sexual attraction in
> men is measurable – any "ex-gay" male who gets a woodie while
> watching "Gladiator" isn't all that "ex").
>
> 4) Specific instances of people committing suicide or otherwise
> harming themselves while under the care of ex-gay ministries or
> conversion therapy practitioners.
>
> If anybody cares about my personal position on the matter, I have
no
> problem with people of faith seeking out resources to deal with
their
> sexuality, and I have no problem with programs that attempt to
change
> people from gay to straight and are honest about the almost total
> failure rate of such attempts.  I have a big problem with forcing
> anybody into unproven and unscientific modes of therapy, and I have
a
> big problem with advocates of "change" who refuse to allow
scientific
> testing to determine whether or not such "change" actually takes
> place.  I'd like to objectively prove that the promoters of ex-gay
> ministries refuse to allow objective testing of sexual response
among
> patients and that they lie about their alleged success rates.

I too would very much like to see a case challenging the claims of
reparative therapy in court if for no other reason because the wave
of devastation they've caused over the years has been immeasurable.
However, they waffle so much in their claims as they speak from both
sides of their mouth that it's hard to pin them down on exactly what
their claims are.

A couple of examples: I recall a report that was issued by the Human
Rights Campaign a couple of years ago that accused Exodus ministries
of offering false hope for claiming that people can overcome
homosexuality. The report was called "Finally Free: Personal
Stories -- How Love and Self-Acceptance Saved Us from 'Ex-Gay'
Ministries" and contained the testimonies of 14 men and women who
tried unsuccessfully to rid themselves of same-sex attractions, most
of them through Exodus-related ministries.

Following the release of this report, Exodus issued a press release
in which former director Bob Davies said: "Reading these stories is
certainly heart-breaking.  [But apparently not heart-breaking enough
for Exodus to re-examine the safety and effectiveness of their
various ex-gay programs.]  But I find it interesting that the entire
focus of each individual seemed to be changing their sexual
orientation. That was very different from my focus upon entering
Exodus many years ago."  [HRC Document Blasts Exodus Ministries;
8/11/00]

Then two months later in the aftermath of the John Paulk fiasco,
Davies announced in another Exodus press release: "I believe that as
an organization we need to re-examine other issues [including] our
use of terms such as 'healing' and 'change'."  [Chairman Disciplined
for Gay Bar Visit; 10/3/00]

So let me get this straight now [no pun intended]: In August 2000
the Executive Director of Exodus International essentially states
that people who go into an "ex-gay" ministry should NOT focus on
changing their sexual orientation.  Hello??!!  Well isn't that what
they've been claiming to be about for the past 20+ years?  And then
two months later the Director goes a step further by acknowledging
that the organization needs to re-examine their use of the
terms "healing" and "change."   Well, duh!!!


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Brian Chase" <lawyerbrianc@h...> wrote:
> I know what nyguy means -- I wouldn't be too enthused about being
hitched up
> to a woodie-meter either, but I'd do it for the cause of truth,
justice and
> making fun of people who make outrageous claims.  If these
programs can't
> manage to scrape up a few hundred volunteers to prove their
claims, then
> they should be universally condemned as liars. (or at least
universally
> ridiculed, which is more fun). -- Of course the big problem is how
to
> ridicule and expose the programs without harming the participants,
who are
> often well meaning people suffering from increadible pain
(rejection by
> church, rejection by family, rejection by the gay community -- not
good).
>
> But anyway, people who volunteer to be in full page ads in
newspapers
> touting their new heterosexual lives can't exactly argue that they
have
> privacy concerns when it comes to their pee-pees and such.  It's
funny how
> people like John Paulk can be totally lurid and candid when it
comes to
> "testifying" about his former sinful ways, but suddenly he's all
about
> privacy concerns when it comes to his current dubious claim of
> heterosexuality.
>
> Oh well, I really do appreciate everybody's help.  Eventually I
think there
> will be a case challenging the claims of repairative therapy in
court -- and
> I wanna be there.  People should have every right to seek whatever
therapy
> they want, but the therapists have a duty to be honest about what
they are
> providing and what the chances of "success" are.  I want these
programs held
> to the same standard that any other provider of counseling
services would be
> held (if a drug rehab program took out "change is possible" ads in
> newspapers without mentioning that they had a 99% failure rate,
they would
> get their asses sued off, and rightly so).
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

<<...the big problem is how to ridicule and expose the programs
without harming the participants, who are often well meaning people
suffering from incredible pain (rejection by church, rejection by
family, rejection by the gay community -- not good).>>

But the well-meaning people who participate in these programs are
often much more severely harmed and much more deeply hurt in the
longer run when they discover -- often after years of believing the
claims -- that the success rate of the change groups is alarmingly
dismal.  And from a faith standpoint, even sadder still, most
Christian people after discovering the "ex-gay" claim is a lie end
up leaving not only the "ex-gay" ministry, but they end up leaving
the Church and their faith all together.  How sad is that? They
already come into the church feeling "different from" and "less
than." Then when they discover they don't actually become "ex-gay,"
most seem unable to separate the two (the "ex-gay" ministry's false
claims from God's true love and acceptance) and they leave God and
their faith altogether.

As you rightly stated, if it was a drug rehab or similar program
that took out "change is possible" ads in newspapers without
mentioning they had a 99% failure rate, they would rightfully get
their butts sued off.  Someone needs to hold them accountable for
their claims and for the wave of destruction they continue to leave
behind.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Brian Chase" <lawyerbrianc@h...> wrote:
> I know what nyguy means -- I wouldn't be too enthused about being
hitched up
> to a woodie-meter either, but I'd do it for the cause of truth,
justice and
> making fun of people who make outrageous claims.  If these
programs can't
> manage to scrape up a few hundred volunteers to prove their
claims, then
> they should be universally condemned as liars. (or at least
universally
> ridiculed, which is more fun). -- Of course the big problem is how
to
> ridicule and expose the programs without harming the participants,
who are
> often well meaning people suffering from increadible pain
(rejection by
> church, rejection by family, rejection by the gay community -- not
good).
>
> But anyway, people who volunteer to be in full page ads in
newspapers
> touting their new heterosexual lives can't exactly argue that they
have
> privacy concerns when it comes to their pee-pees and such.  It's
funny how
> people like John Paulk can be totally lurid and candid when it
comes to
> "testifying" about his former sinful ways, but suddenly he's all
about
> privacy concerns when it comes to his current dubious claim of
> heterosexuality.
>
> Oh well, I really do appreciate everybody's help.  Eventually I
think there
> will be a case challenging the claims of repairative therapy in
court -- and
> I wanna be there.  People should have every right to seek whatever
therapy
> they want, but the therapists have a duty to be honest about what
they are
> providing and what the chances of "success" are.  I want these
programs held
> to the same standard that any other provider of counseling
services would be
> held (if a drug rehab program took out "change is possible" ads in
> newspapers without mentioning that they had a 99% failure rate,
they would
> get their asses sued off, and rightly so).
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

An article by Dr. Warren Throckmorton, "Initial Empirical and
Clinical Findings Concerning the Change Process for Ex-Gays," has
been published in the June 2002 issue of the American Psychological
Association's publication Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Brian Chase" <lawyerbrianc@h...> wrote:
> I know what nyguy means -- I wouldn't be too enthused about being
hitched up
> to a woodie-meter either, but I'd do it for the cause of truth,
justice and
> making fun of people who make outrageous claims.  If these programs
can't
> manage to scrape up a few hundred volunteers to prove their claims,
then
> they should be universally condemned as liars. (or at least
universally
> ridiculed, which is more fun). -- Of course the big problem is how
to
> ridicule and expose the programs without harming the participants,
who are
> often well meaning people suffering from increadible pain
(rejection by
> church, rejection by family, rejection by the gay community -- not
good).
>
> But anyway, people who volunteer to be in full page ads in
newspapers
> touting their new heterosexual lives can't exactly argue that they
have
> privacy concerns when it comes to their pee-pees and such.  It's
funny how
> people like John Paulk can be totally lurid and candid when it
comes to
> "testifying" about his former sinful ways, but suddenly he's all
about
> privacy concerns when it comes to his current dubious claim of
> heterosexuality.
>
> Oh well, I really do appreciate everybody's help.  Eventually I
think there
> will be a case challenging the claims of repairative therapy in
court -- and
> I wanna be there.  People should have every right to seek whatever
therapy
> they want, but the therapists have a duty to be honest about what
they are
> providing and what the chances of "success" are.  I want these
programs held
> to the same standard that any other provider of counseling services
would be
> held (if a drug rehab program took out "change is possible" ads in
> newspapers without mentioning that they had a 99% failure rate,
they would
> get their asses sued off, and rightly so).
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

--- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
Ken:   However, if their choice is to follow their faith instead of
their
> sexual feelings, programs that provide help in reduction or control
> of their behaviour and urges, are a valid and useful resource.>>

nyguy:   It would appear you get yourself into trouble right at the
get-go
by
< presuming the two are mutually exclusive.
................................................................
I know that my experience is limited, but I have the impression that
for
homosexually oriented people who were active in a Christian faith,
their testimony is usually that they indeed did have to make a choice
between their faith at that time and sexual activity.  I do not deny
that gay people can have a strong Christian faith, but it seems to be
a faith that is developed around the concept of their sexuality, not
the other way around.
Ken.




  Perhaps, homosexually-
> oriented people, just like heterosexually-oriented people, need not
> repent of their sexual orientation, but rather of their sinful
> responses to them.  No one should engage in reckless self-
indulgence
> or socially and personally irresponsible behavior -- sexually or
> otherwise.  And therefore, I'm all for programs that help people
> live healthier and more responsibly with their sexuality as well as
> in other areas of their lives.  And this can certainly encompass
and
> include a "reduction or control of their urges." But when a program
> promotes and/or promises a change in sexual orientation, that's a
> different matter altogether.
>
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., "armwa" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > Fitrst up, I shouldn't be here because I don't agree with the
> > expressed aims of the group.  However, I do think this research
is
> a
> > good idea.  There are people offering "change" programs that need
> to
> > be weeded out.  It seems that you are starting with a negative
> > hypothesis and that's ok, as long as you objectively consider ALL
> of
> > the evidence.  I know that NARTH will not be a popular
> organisation
> > with members of this board, but you should at least consider what
> > they have to say before dismissing it.  Have a look at
> > http://www.narth.com/docs/barring.html   which is
> entitled: "Former
> > APA president condemns APA for barring research".  Will you
> consider
> > anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?  If you approach
> groups
> > running change programs (see Links on the Yahoo group discussion
> > Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you will get them ...
> then
> > of course you will need to verify them in some way.
> >
> > In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict
> between
> > their sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the desired
> > change in their orientation.  However, if their choice is to
> follow
> > their faith instead of their sexual feelings, programs that
> provide
> > help in reduction or control of their behaviour and urges, are a
> > valid and useful resource.  I agree with you that ALL programs
> need
> > to be run professionally, and to be totally honest about what
they
> > offer and what they have achieved.
> > Ken

<<I know that my experience is limited, but I have the impression
that for homosexually oriented people who were active in a Christian
faith, their testimony is usually that they indeed did have to make
a choice between their faith at that time and sexual activity. I do
not deny that gay people can have a strong Christian faith, but it
seems to be a faith that is developed around the concept of their
sexuality, not the other way around.>>

That's a poor and erroneous assumption, Ken.  Speaking for myself,
when I came to faith over 20 years ago I did think I had to choose
between the two.  And so after my decision to follow Christ and in
my desire to walk obediently to and in my faith, I too became "ex-
gay" when told one couldn't be gay and Christian.  Not knowing much
about the Bible at that time, I believed what I was told, joined one
of the many "ex-gay" ministries and became skilled at, walked in and
perpetuated their doctrine for many years.  I even eventually became
an "ex-gay" ministry leader myself.  However, as have so many
others, I eventually came to understand that much of what I had been
taught by them was both untrue and unbiblical.

Not only is sexual orientation not mutable and that most, if not
all, homosexually-oriented people do not shed their same-sex
attractions [Jeremy Marks, former leader of Britian's Exodus "ex-
gay" movement is another of the many former "ex-gay" leaders who
learned this.  He came forward some time ago to announce that not
only has his orientation never changed, but in some 15 years of
ministry he's never seen anyone else's change either.]  But more
importantly, I discovered what the "ex-gay" and "change" groups say
about the Bible and homosexuality is not true and not biblical --
unless, of course, one takes the passages they love to quote out of
their context.

Despite their claims to the contrary, the fact that the violation of
others is strongly condemned in the few passages that are repeatedly
taken out of context, doesn't mean that all homosexual behavior
warrants such censure any more than all heterosexuals are to be
condemned for their sexual behavior by association with the sins of
pedophilia, lust, rape, fornication or adultery.  The few verses in
Scripture that proscribe sexual union between men all seek to
address sins of idolatry, rebellion, self-indulgence, abuse, or
grossly irresponsible behavior.  None refer to gay or straight
people, who love their partners, are faithful to them and who shun
sexual immorality, according to biblical definitions.

The bottom line here Ken, is that some of us have a very high view
of Scripture, take it quite seriously, invest much time in studying
it -- and do not develop our faith "around [our] concept of
sexuality."  While this may be the case with some, it is unfair and
misguided to make such a unfounded generalization.  Homosexually-
oriented people -- like heterosexually-oriented people -- need not
repent of their sexuality, but rather of their sinful responses to
them.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "armwa" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Ken:   However, if their choice is to follow their faith instead
of
> their
> > sexual feelings, programs that provide help in reduction or
control
> > of their behaviour and urges, are a valid and useful resource.>>
>
> nyguy:   It would appear you get yourself into trouble right at
the
> get-go
> by
> < presuming the two are mutually exclusive.
> ................................................................
> I know that my experience is limited, but I have the impression
that
> for
> homosexually oriented people who were active in a Christian faith,
> their testimony is usually that they indeed did have to make a
choice
> between their faith at that time and sexual activity.  I do not
deny
> that gay people can have a strong Christian faith, but it seems to
be
> a faith that is developed around the concept of their sexuality,
not
> the other way around.
> Ken.
>
>
>
>
>  Perhaps, homosexually-
> > oriented people, just like heterosexually-oriented people, need
not
> > repent of their sexual orientation, but rather of their sinful
> > responses to them.  No one should engage in reckless self-
> indulgence
> > or socially and personally irresponsible behavior -- sexually or
> > otherwise.  And therefore, I'm all for programs that help people
> > live healthier and more responsibly with their sexuality as well
as
> > in other areas of their lives.  And this can certainly encompass
> and
> > include a "reduction or control of their urges." But when a
program
> > promotes and/or promises a change in sexual orientation, that's
a
> > different matter altogether.
> >
> >
> > --- In exexgayministry@y..., "armwa" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > > Fitrst up, I shouldn't be here because I don't agree with the
> > > expressed aims of the group.  However, I do think this
research
> is
> > a
> > > good idea.  There are people offering "change" programs that
need
> > to
> > > be weeded out.  It seems that you are starting with a negative
> > > hypothesis and that's ok, as long as you objectively consider
ALL
> > of
> > > the evidence.  I know that NARTH will not be a popular
> > organisation
> > > with members of this board, but you should at least consider
what
> > > they have to say before dismissing it.  Have a look at
> > > http://www.narth.com/docs/barring.html   which is
> > entitled: "Former
> > > APA president condemns APA for barring research".  Will you
> > consider
> > > anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies?  If you approach
> > groups
> > > running change programs (see Links on the Yahoo group
discussion
> > > Board "exgayministry") and ask for these you will get them ...
> > then
> > > of course you will need to verify them in some way.
> > >
> > > In my opinion, some gay people who are experiencing conflict
> > between
> > > their sexuality and spirituality, may never achieve the
desired
> > > change in their orientation.  However, if their choice is to
> > follow
> > > their faith instead of their sexual feelings, programs that
> > provide
> > > help in reduction or control of their behaviour and urges, are
a
> > > valid and useful resource.  I agree with you that ALL programs
> > need
> > > to be run professionally, and to be totally honest about what
> they
> > > offer and what they have achieved.
> > > Ken

--- In exexgayministry@y..., "armwa" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> ................................................................
> I know that my experience is limited, but I have the impression
that
> for
> homosexually oriented people who were active in a Christian faith,
> their testimony is usually that they indeed did have to make a
choice
> between their faith at that time and sexual activity.  I do not
deny
> that gay people can have a strong Christian faith, but it seems to
be
> a faith that is developed around the concept of their sexuality,
not
> the other way around.
> Ken.

So...of course the SAME would be said about heterosexuals.  Their
faith was developed around the concept of their sexuality.  Sorry,
that makes no sense at all!

It is like the idea that homosexuals CHOOSE to be gay while
heterosexuals somehow never "choose" to be straight!

D*

No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.  It is
difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual Christians
I
know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour - eg,
chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
separated or divorced, etc.  The homosexual Christians I have spoken
to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace same
sex
behaviour. My original point was that change programs may be
appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a faith which
does not accept homosexual acts.

"MY ORIGINAL POINT WAS THAT CHANGE PROGRAMS MAY BE APPROPRIATE FOR
HOMOSEXUAL CHRISTIANS WHO STILL RETAIN A FAITH WHICH DOES NOT ACCEPT
HOMOSEXUAL ACTS.>>

What do you mean by "appropriate?"  And more importantly, wouldn't
the "appropriateness" of these programs heavily depend on (a) how
one defines "change" and (b) whether they can actually deliver on
the "change" they offer and promise?

It appears there are two issues that repeatedly come up on this
board but tend to get mixed and obscured together.  One has to do
with what the Bible REALLY does say, and not say, about
homosexuality, and consequently whether the need to "not accept
homosexual acts" is really biblical and a required tenet of the
Christian faith.  Surely, increasing numbers of respected
theologians and biblical scholars are saying it is not.

The other issue, and the one I'm prepared to make some comments on
in this post, has to do with the safety and effectiveness of
these "ex-gay" and "change" ministries, i.e. does "change" actually
take place in that gay people really become "ex-gay?"  Even Bob
Davies, the former Exodus national director himself recognized the
need to look at this more closely when he announced in a press
release: "...we need to re-examine other issues [including] our use
of terms such as 'healing' and 'change'."  [Chairman Disciplined for
Gay Bar Visit; 10/3/00]

What are the factors that cause people to seek out one of
these "change" ministries in the first place?  Gay people generally
grow up feeling "different from" and "less than" their non-gay
counterparts. They're often made to feel they do not measure up and
are often told they are "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "shameful,"
etc. for a variety of reasons including their unasked for
orientation.

Although there is both healthy and unhealthy shame, unhealthy shame
can bring such lowered self-esteem that one can begin to fear
looking into the face of others.  Shame can be a terrible blow to a
child's tender selfhood.  It makes a child feel unacceptable and
dirty as well as being rejected.  Shame can also lead to isolation
because of feeling so alone and looked down upon by everyone.  It is
difficult to be rational when shame comes because the person feels
so humiliated.

This painful feeling can begin through many sources: The continual
put-down, mocking or name calling by family members or peers; the
acts of molestation, rape or incest; the awkward feeling of being
socially inept, not knowing what to say; having acne or a large nose
or ears or feet and being made fun of for these; being told you are
shameful because of being overweight or for wetting the bed; being
beaten or slapped regularly; being continually criticized; being
disgraced in front of class for an inability to learn; humiliated in
front of friends by parents; being unable to play ball as young boy;
being made to feel you can't do anything right, etc.

These are the people who seek out "change" ministries.  Moreover,
many people who have experienced this unhealthy and unwarranted
shame do not have selfhood or support enough to let the shame go and
grow from the experience.   And unlike many who are not gay, there
often are no healthy and helpful support systems in place to help
them deal with any of this in a healthful way.  Where heterosexual
kids often have inherent support from their families, their
churches, from society at large and enjoy legal support for their
partnerships, etc., gay people more often than not have none of
this.

This may be why some gay people as you implied, attempt make up some
of their own rules.  After all, to live as a gay man, you have to
break one of the biggest rules of all just to join up.  Even very
little boys know that they're supposed to get married to a girl when
they grow up.  After realizing that doesn't apply to them, a lot of
people start calling all the rules into question.  And instead of
having the selfhood or support enough to let the shame go and grow
from the experience they continue to re-live the shame, and shame
seems to become who they are.  The feeling is so devastating that it
is often taken as an identity.  No longer does shame remain, "I feel
shame," but it becomes "I am shameful."   From that false sense of
identity they tell themselves, "I am disgusting," "I am
sickening," "I am pitiful," I'm a sick faggot," "I don't deserve to
live," etc.   These are the life experiences that drive someone to
seek out a "change" ministry in the first place.

"Healing" may take place in some of these ministries in that one can
learn to develop a more healthful self-image and be "healed" from
some of the feelings of shame, such as:
feeling "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "pitiful," "sickening," "inept
," "not good enough" -- and a slew of other things so many of these
people were made to believe about themselves.   But "change"
ministries that define, offer or promise "change" as a change in
orientation -- which is certainly the case with most of them -- have
caused much more devastation than they have caused healing when
people come to realize they do not become hertosexual.  When people
are made to feel that becoming straight is the only way by which
they can become more acceptable to themselves and to the people
around them you can begin to see how desperately one would need to
cling to this false hope.   Perhaps its time that the people causing
all of these poor wounded souls to feel they must "change" their
orientation to become acceptable are the ones who really need to
start changing.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.  It is
> difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual
Christians
> I
> know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour - eg,
> chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> separated or divorced, etc.  The homosexual Christians I have
spoken
> to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace same
> sex
> behaviour. My original point was that change programs may be
> appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a faith
which
> does not accept homosexual acts.

--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.  It is
> difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual Christians
> I
> know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour - eg,
> chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> separated or divorced, etc.

ONE:  That would be a good idea if it were true or even consistant.
As a former student first at a secular school and later at a
conservative Baptist university, most of the heterosexual Christians
I have known were, for the most part, as sexually active as those who
did not claim to be Christian!

TWO:  Your ideas of a sexual "standard" are, in fact, NOT standard
among those who claim to be Christian.  I would submit that even
those whom you think are so chaste, are really NOT as they appear!

>The homosexual Christians I have spoken
> to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace same
> sex
> behaviour.

...unlike the so-called heterosexual-Christains who simply DO IT in
private while claiming chastity to the public.

>My original point was that change programs may be
> appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a faith
which
> does not accept homosexual acts.

Again, THAT would be a good idea IF those "change programs" actually
produced change...which none have been able to prove so far!!!

Your comments sound spiritual but time has proven that they do not
reflect the real world.


=======
=====
====
===
==
=

Hello, I am hoping someone can shed some light to my problems.  I am
married, and have been for 12 years.  I finally got the nerve to tell
my wife that I am gay 7 months ago, and the road from there has been
almost unbearable!  I honestly love her, and don't want to hurt her,
but I feel the need to be who I am.  Since I have told her I've been
going to an ex gay ministry, a christian couselor, and have tried to
seek out God.  I wasn't raised as a christian, but I'm trying so hard
now.  I have had so many things threw at me by these ex gays that I
tried to kill myself, because they say God didn't entend this and I
will NEVER be happy as a gay man.  That the gay life is built on
being young, that after you turn 35 no one wants you, that a
relationship in the gay life doesn't exist, that even if you have a
lover you or your lover will get sex outside of your relationship,
that if I go to the gay life I will die alone and lonely...  You name
it, I've been told it, and don't want to believe it, it hurts to bad
to believe that what I truly am, can't be!  My wife and I even
finally told our pastor, who doesn't really understand it, but will
try to be there for me.  I'm so scared, so lonely, so screwed up at
this point.  I was happier when I thought I was born gay!  Any
comments on this, PLEEEEZ!  I live in North Carolina...  Thanks

I'm sorry the ex-gay ministry is trying to 'scare you straight'.
The ex-gay tactics that you describe are familiar to me and others
in this group.  I was also told by an ex-gay ministry that the
gay "lifestyle" is about narcissism, sexually promiscuity, and that
gay, long-term, monogomous relationships were only a fantasy.  They
even strongly implied that I would get HIV if I decided to accept my
homosexual identity.  However, since leaving the ex-gay 'lifestyle',
I have realized that ex-gay promoters were only attempting to scare
me into staying with their program.  Certainly there are the
stereotypical shallow, sex- and image-centered gay men, but it is a
blantant lie to say all or most gay men are like this.

The turning point in my ex-gay experience was when I realized that
nearly my entire life became focused on being ex-gay.  I came to the
conclusion that it did not make any sense for God to want me to
spend the rest of my life tranfixed on my sexuality.  That's when I
realized that I was trying too hard to keep the ex-gay notion alive
when I really didn't believe it.

You and your wife are going through an extremely difficult
transition, so I won't pretend that there is a quick and easy answer
to your situation.  However, I will suggest that you try other
support resources and counselors besides those who have a particular
agenda to promote.  What helped me during my struggle was first
acknowledging that I didn't know what my beliefs about homosexuality
really were and empowering myself to begin re-discovering my faith.
So, I think it is very important to find support that will allow you
to pursue your faith and not just attempt to persuade you into
buying-into a particular program.

I'm glad you posted here and I hope we can offer some assistance.  I
also encourage you to explore other perspectives to counter the ex-
gay propaganda.  I suggest visiting a local MCC church,
http://www.ufmcc.org, and/or PFLAG, http://www.pflag.org.

Keep in touch,

Norm!



--- In exexgayministry@y..., "electro055" <electroman05@w...> wrote:
> Hello, I am hoping someone can shed some light to my problems.  I
am
> married, and have been for 12 years.  I finally got the nerve to
tell
> my wife that I am gay 7 months ago, and the road from there has
been
> almost unbearable!  I honestly love her, and don't want to hurt
her,

> but I feel the need to be who I am.  Since I have told her I've
been
> going to an ex gay ministry, a christian couselor, and have tried
to
> seek out God.  I wasn't raised as a christian, but I'm trying so
hard
> now.  I have had so many things threw at me by these ex gays that
I
> tried to kill myself, because they say God didn't entend this and
I
> will NEVER be happy as a gay man.  That the gay life is built on
> being young, that after you turn 35 no one wants you, that a
> relationship in the gay life doesn't exist, that even if you have
a
> lover you or your lover will get sex outside of your relationship,
> that if I go to the gay life I will die alone and lonely...  You
name
> it, I've been told it, and don't want to believe it, it hurts to
bad
> to believe that what I truly am, can't be!  My wife and I even
> finally told our pastor, who doesn't really understand it, but
will
> try to be there for me.  I'm so scared, so lonely, so screwed up
at
> this point.  I was happier when I thought I was born gay!  Any
> comments on this, PLEEEEZ!  I live in North Carolina...  Thanks

nyguy, that was a very moving post.  Shame can be a destructive
emotion.  With regard to your first issue, What does the Bible really
say, I don't intend to ear bash you with my beliefs except that I do
know gay men who have examined both sides of the Scriptural arguments
and still cannot accept homosexuality as God's will for their lives.
What do you offer these people?

Many heterosexual people make the assumption that ALL gays are wildly
promiscuous, just because SOME are.  Do you think you could be making
a similar generalization about the rationale & effectiveness
of "change ministries"?

As for the definition of "change", I think that is a very interesting
area:  Change?  Reduction?  Control?  And change in what ...
Orientation?  Behaviour?  Thinking?  There are many alternatives, and
when a group emphatically states that they have the one and only
answer, I think its approach is questionable.

I usually avoid personal examples in a debate but, hey, rules are
made to be broken, right?   At an earlier stage of my life I was what
some would call a 6 on the Kinsey scale; my behaviour included
being "wildly promiscuous" as well as having two LTRs.  Today I am
married with children.  Do I still experience same sex urges ...
occasionally.   Am I a happy man ... YES.  I am reluctant to use
personal experiences because it is not my intention to imply that
everyone will make the same journey.  It is one example, that's all.
Ken.



--- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> What do you mean by "appropriate?"  And more importantly, wouldn't
> the "appropriateness" of these programs heavily depend on (a) how
> one defines "change" and (b) whether they can actually deliver on
> the "change" they offer and promise?
>
> It appears there are two issues that repeatedly come up on this
> board but tend to get mixed and obscured together.  One has to do
> with what the Bible REALLY does say, and not say, about
> homosexuality, and consequently whether the need to "not accept
> homosexual acts" is really biblical and a required tenet of the
> Christian faith.  Surely, increasing numbers of respected
> theologians and biblical scholars are saying it is not.
>
> The other issue, and the one I'm prepared to make some comments on
> in this post, has to do with the safety and effectiveness of
> these "ex-gay" and "change" ministries, i.e. does "change" actually
> take place in that gay people really become "ex-gay?"  Even Bob
> Davies, the former Exodus national director himself recognized the
> need to look at this more closely when he announced in a press
> release: "...we need to re-examine other issues [including] our use
> of terms such as 'healing' and 'change'."  [Chairman Disciplined
for
> Gay Bar Visit; 10/3/00]
>
> What are the factors that cause people to seek out one of
> these "change" ministries in the first place?  Gay people generally
> grow up feeling "different from" and "less than" their non-gay
> counterparts. They're often made to feel they do not measure up and
> are often told they are "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "shameful,"
> etc. for a variety of reasons including their unasked for
> orientation.
>
> Although there is both healthy and unhealthy shame, unhealthy shame
> can bring such lowered self-esteem that one can begin to fear
> looking into the face of others.  Shame can be a terrible blow to a
> child's tender selfhood.  It makes a child feel unacceptable and
> dirty as well as being rejected.  Shame can also lead to isolation
> because of feeling so alone and looked down upon by everyone.  It
is
> difficult to be rational when shame comes because the person feels
> so humiliated.
>
> This painful feeling can begin through many sources: The continual
> put-down, mocking or name calling by family members or peers; the
> acts of molestation, rape or incest; the awkward feeling of being
> socially inept, not knowing what to say; having acne or a large
nose
> or ears or feet and being made fun of for these; being told you are
> shameful because of being overweight or for wetting the bed; being
> beaten or slapped regularly; being continually criticized; being
> disgraced in front of class for an inability to learn; humiliated
in
> front of friends by parents; being unable to play ball as young
boy;
> being made to feel you can't do anything right, etc.
>
> These are the people who seek out "change" ministries.  Moreover,
> many people who have experienced this unhealthy and unwarranted
> shame do not have selfhood or support enough to let the shame go
and
> grow from the experience.   And unlike many who are not gay, there
> often are no healthy and helpful support systems in place to help
> them deal with any of this in a healthful way.  Where heterosexual
> kids often have inherent support from their families, their
> churches, from society at large and enjoy legal support for their
> partnerships, etc., gay people more often than not have none of
> this.
>
> This may be why some gay people as you implied, attempt make up
some
> of their own rules.  After all, to live as a gay man, you have to
> break one of the biggest rules of all just to join up.  Even very
> little boys know that they're supposed to get married to a girl
when
> they grow up.  After realizing that doesn't apply to them, a lot of
> people start calling all the rules into question.  And instead of
> having the selfhood or support enough to let the shame go and grow
> from the experience they continue to re-live the shame, and shame
> seems to become who they are.  The feeling is so devastating that
it
> is often taken as an identity.  No longer does shame remain, "I
feel
> shame," but it becomes "I am shameful."   From that false sense of
> identity they tell themselves, "I am disgusting," "I am
> sickening," "I am pitiful," I'm a sick faggot," "I don't deserve to
> live," etc.   These are the life experiences that drive someone to
> seek out a "change" ministry in the first place.
>
> "Healing" may take place in some of these ministries in that one
can
> learn to develop a more healthful self-image and be "healed" from
> some of the feelings of shame, such as:
>
feeling "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "pitiful," "sickening," "inept
> ," "not good enough" -- and a slew of other things so many of these
> people were made to believe about themselves.   But "change"
> ministries that define, offer or promise "change" as a change in
> orientation -- which is certainly the case with most of them --
have
> caused much more devastation than they have caused healing when
> people come to realize they do not become hertosexual.  When people
> are made to feel that becoming straight is the only way by which
> they can become more acceptable to themselves and to the people
> around them you can begin to see how desperately one would need to
> cling to this false hope.   Perhaps its time that the people
causing
> all of these poor wounded souls to feel they must "change" their
> orientation to become acceptable are the ones who really need to
> start changing.
>
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.  It
is
> > difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual
> Christians
> > I
> > know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour - eg,
> > chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> > separated or divorced, etc.  The homosexual Christians I have
> spoken
> > to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace same
> > sex
> > behaviour. My original point was that change programs may be
> > appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a faith
> which
> > does not accept homosexual acts.

What do I offer those people who cannot accept homosexuality as
God's will for their lives?  First of all, I don't believe anyone
should be forced to violate their consciences.  That would not be
healthy on any level and, according to the apostle Paul, it would be
sin.

In and around Romans 14, Paul addresses a church embroiled in
disputes and controversies over behavior and lifestyle.  The church
is made up of Christians he sees as "weak-in-faith" and Christians
who are "strong-in-faith."  He clearly identifies himself among
the "strong."  He sees the "weak-in-faith" as those who are less
able or willing to trust in God's grace alone, without adding
restrictive rules and regulations about diets and days as
requirements for proper Christian lifestyle.  Such a person is "at
heart still a legalist [and] believes that he can gain God's favor
by doing certain things and abstaining from others," says William
Barclay.  Paul does not regard these rules and restrictions as an
expression of faith as such.

In Paul's day, one of the biggest controversies in the church was
over laws about observing diets and days.  In our day, perhaps the
biggest controversy is over homosexuality.  The "weak-in-faith"
today add restrictive rules against any and all expression of
homosexuality as a requirement for Christian lifestyle.
The "strong" today do not insist on adding such rules and
regulations and they better understand the freedom that Paul said
Christians have in Christ.

Paul says that the stronger Christians should welcome the less
mature into the fellowship.  And he says the "strong" should welcome
them without doing so only to argue and force them to change their
views.  In Paul's day, the "weak-in-faith" was in the minority.  In
our day – so far as homosexuality is concerned – the "weak-in-faith"
is the majority.  And according to Paul, the majority should not try
to use its power position to impose its view on the minority.  In
our day, that means that the antigay Christians should not force
Christian gays and lesbians to adopt an antigay doctrine or else
find themselves excluded from the fellowship.  Of course, the
opposite is true too.  The broad-minded minority should not practice
aggression against the narrow-minded majority.  Paul's view is that
the liberty of the Christian assembly should be able to embrace
divergent views and practices without a feeling that they must be
resolved or that a common mind must be achieved on every point of
disagreement.

Today, most Christians don't get upset over what others eat or what
they do on Sundays.  Today, Christians are much more likely to get
upset over homosexuality.  So lest anyone think that issues of diet
and days in those days are not analogous to gay issues today, we
must be reminded of the extreme importance of the dietary laws and
the Sabbath commandment for Jews of that early period.  The dietary
laws are clearly set forth in the Torah (Lev 11:1-23; Deut 14:3-
12).

Now remember that required Sabbath observance was the subject of one
of the Ten Commandments of the Law of Moses.  And Jesus had said
that not one jot or one tittle of that Law would pass away (Matt
5:18).  And that Sabbath commandment was rooted in creation (Gen 2:2-
3; Exod 20:8-11) no less than antigay evangelicals root mandated
heterosexuality and antigay theology in the creation of "Adam and
Eve, not Adam and Steve."  It must have seemed to traditionalists of
Paul's day that he'd turned his back on scripture and had gone
hopelessly heretical.

So for those people who cannot accept homosexuality as God's will
for their lives I say they should obey their consciences but keep
their eyes, ears and heart open.  I too once believed homosexuality
in any way, shape or form was sin, against God's will, and against
the clear teachings of the Bible.  That is what I had been taught.
It took me quite some time to realize the teaching was not biblical
and one can only come to such a conclusion if the few passages that
are used to condemn all same-sex relations are taken out of their
proper context.

But then again, over the years people have been taught and found
proofs in the Bible that the world is only 6,000 years old, that
slavery is God-ordained, that women and blacks should not be allowed
to vote, that interracial marriage is wrong, that women should
neither preach not wear lipstick, and on and on.  The Bible verses
that once footnoted these notions are all still in the Bible.  But
most Christians have changed their minds about these matters.   My
prayer for people who cannot accept their sexualty and/or learn to
express it responsibly is that these "weak-in-faith" believers can
eventually become "strong-in-faith."  I know that many people need
to learn to put together a theologically conservative Christian
faith with their own or other person's homosexuality.  I find it
quite sad to see people spend their entire lives thinking they have
to become straight to follow Christ and/or to be more acceptable to
themselves and the people around them -- especially with no credible
evidence that gay people ever become straight. I'm here (as are
others) to help in whatever ways I can.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> nyguy, that was a very moving post.  Shame can be a destructive
> emotion.  With regard to your first issue, What does the Bible
really
> say, I don't intend to ear bash you with my beliefs except that I
do
> know gay men who have examined both sides of the Scriptural
arguments
> and still cannot accept homosexuality as God's will for their
lives.
> What do you offer these people?
>
> Many heterosexual people make the assumption that ALL gays are
wildly
> promiscuous, just because SOME are.  Do you think you could be
making
> a similar generalization about the rationale & effectiveness
> of "change ministries"?
>
> As for the definition of "change", I think that is a very
interesting
> area:  Change?  Reduction?  Control?  And change in what ...
> Orientation?  Behaviour?  Thinking?  There are many alternatives,
and
> when a group emphatically states that they have the one and only
> answer, I think its approach is questionable.
>
> I usually avoid personal examples in a debate but, hey, rules are
> made to be broken, right?   At an earlier stage of my life I was
what
> some would call a 6 on the Kinsey scale; my behaviour included
> being "wildly promiscuous" as well as having two LTRs.  Today I am
> married with children.  Do I still experience same sex urges ...
> occasionally.   Am I a happy man ... YES.  I am reluctant to use
> personal experiences because it is not my intention to imply that
> everyone will make the same journey.  It is one example, that's
all.
> Ken.
>
>
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > What do you mean by "appropriate?"  And more importantly,
wouldn't
> > the "appropriateness" of these programs heavily depend on (a)
how
> > one defines "change" and (b) whether they can actually deliver
on
> > the "change" they offer and promise?
> >
> > It appears there are two issues that repeatedly come up on this
> > board but tend to get mixed and obscured together.  One has to
do
> > with what the Bible REALLY does say, and not say, about
> > homosexuality, and consequently whether the need to "not accept
> > homosexual acts" is really biblical and a required tenet of the
> > Christian faith.  Surely, increasing numbers of respected
> > theologians and biblical scholars are saying it is not.
> >
> > The other issue, and the one I'm prepared to make some comments
on
> > in this post, has to do with the safety and effectiveness of
> > these "ex-gay" and "change" ministries, i.e. does "change"
actually
> > take place in that gay people really become "ex-gay?"  Even Bob
> > Davies, the former Exodus national director himself recognized
the
> > need to look at this more closely when he announced in a press
> > release: "...we need to re-examine other issues [including] our
use
> > of terms such as 'healing' and 'change'."  [Chairman Disciplined
> for
> > Gay Bar Visit; 10/3/00]
> >
> > What are the factors that cause people to seek out one of
> > these "change" ministries in the first place?  Gay people
generally
> > grow up feeling "different from" and "less than" their non-gay
> > counterparts. They're often made to feel they do not measure up
and
> > are often told they
are "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "shameful,"
> > etc. for a variety of reasons including their unasked for
> > orientation.
> >
> > Although there is both healthy and unhealthy shame, unhealthy
shame
> > can bring such lowered self-esteem that one can begin to fear
> > looking into the face of others.  Shame can be a terrible blow
to a
> > child's tender selfhood.  It makes a child feel unacceptable and
> > dirty as well as being rejected.  Shame can also lead to
isolation
> > because of feeling so alone and looked down upon by everyone.
It
> is
> > difficult to be rational when shame comes because the person
feels
> > so humiliated.
> >
> > This painful feeling can begin through many sources: The
continual
> > put-down, mocking or name calling by family members or peers;
the
> > acts of molestation, rape or incest; the awkward feeling of
being
> > socially inept, not knowing what to say; having acne or a large
> nose
> > or ears or feet and being made fun of for these; being told you
are
> > shameful because of being overweight or for wetting the bed;
being
> > beaten or slapped regularly; being continually criticized; being
> > disgraced in front of class for an inability to learn;
humiliated
> in
> > front of friends by parents; being unable to play ball as young
> boy;
> > being made to feel you can't do anything right, etc.
> >
> > These are the people who seek out "change" ministries.
Moreover,
> > many people who have experienced this unhealthy and unwarranted
> > shame do not have selfhood or support enough to let the shame go
> and
> > grow from the experience.   And unlike many who are not gay,
there
> > often are no healthy and helpful support systems in place to
help
> > them deal with any of this in a healthful way.  Where
heterosexual
> > kids often have inherent support from their families, their
> > churches, from society at large and enjoy legal support for
their
> > partnerships, etc., gay people more often than not have none of
> > this.
> >
> > This may be why some gay people as you implied, attempt make up
> some
> > of their own rules.  After all, to live as a gay man, you have
to
> > break one of the biggest rules of all just to join up.  Even
very
> > little boys know that they're supposed to get married to a girl
> when
> > they grow up.  After realizing that doesn't apply to them, a lot
of
> > people start calling all the rules into question.  And instead
of
> > having the selfhood or support enough to let the shame go and
grow
> > from the experience they continue to re-live the shame, and
shame
> > seems to become who they are.  The feeling is so devastating
that
> it
> > is often taken as an identity.  No longer does shame remain, "I
> feel
> > shame," but it becomes "I am shameful."   From that false sense
of
> > identity they tell themselves, "I am disgusting," "I am
> > sickening," "I am pitiful," I'm a sick faggot," "I don't deserve
to
> > live," etc.   These are the life experiences that drive someone
to
> > seek out a "change" ministry in the first place.
> >
> > "Healing" may take place in some of these ministries in that one
> can
> > learn to develop a more healthful self-image and be "healed"
from
> > some of the feelings of shame, such as:
> >
>
feeling "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "pitiful," "sickening," "inept
> > ," "not good enough" -- and a slew of other things so many of
these
> > people were made to believe about themselves.   But "change"
> > ministries that define, offer or promise "change" as a change in
> > orientation -- which is certainly the case with most of them --
> have
> > caused much more devastation than they have caused healing when
> > people come to realize they do not become hertosexual.  When
people
> > are made to feel that becoming straight is the only way by which
> > they can become more acceptable to themselves and to the people
> > around them you can begin to see how desperately one would need
to
> > cling to this false hope.   Perhaps its time that the people
> causing
> > all of these poor wounded souls to feel they must "change" their
> > orientation to become acceptable are the ones who really need to
> > start changing.
> >
> >
> > --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > > No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.
It
> is
> > > difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual
> > Christians
> > > I
> > > know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour - eg,
> > > chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> > > separated or divorced, etc.  The homosexual Christians I have
> > spoken
> > > to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace
same
> > > sex
> > > behaviour. My original point was that change programs may be
> > > appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a faith
> > which
> > > does not accept homosexual acts.

caklldon2k wrote:  " Your ideas of a sexual "standard" are, in fact,
>NOT standard among those who claim to be Christian.  I would submit
>that even those whom you think are so chaste, are really NOT as they
>appear!"                                                          ...
.........................................................

I'm not sure how I can ascertain the truth of your last sentence
above without being harassed or possibly imprisoned!

In spite of some people's behaviour, I have yet to come across a
church that approves of casual sex.  You seem to be arguing that
because some people do not obey the speed limit, speed limits are of
little use and can be abandoned.

But I think we are talking about the principle here, rather than
individual behaviour.  The gay author, John McNeil, argues
that "lived experience" ought to be the basis of Biblical
interpretation.  I feel in doing that, we are in danger of creating
God in our own image, and we then have a licence to do whatever we
want.  Reconstructing your Christian faith to encompass same sex
behaviour is one way of reconciling your spirituality and sexuality.
I'm suggesting that there are other alternatives.
Change/shift/reduction/control strategies are some of these.

I think you are right about there being a high failure rate. A
possible cause is the one-size-fits-all approach.  It is clear that
some people have succeeded in achieving the changes they wanted in
their lives while others have failed.  Proof of success, judged only
by a level of significance in a controlled experimental study, seems
inappropriate to me.  I think a survey approach, similar to that used
by Alan Bell & Martin Weinberg ("Homosexualities: A Study of
Diversity Among Men and Women") could provide more insight.
http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/jul1979/v36-2-bookreview24.htm


--- In exexgayministry@y..., calldon2k <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.  It
is
> > difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual
Christians
> > I
> > know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour - eg,
> > chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> > separated or divorced, etc.
>
> ONE:  That would be a good idea if it were true or even
consistant.
> As a former student first at a secular school and later at a
> conservative Baptist university, most of the heterosexual
Christians
> I have known were, for the most part, as sexually active as those
who
> did not claim to be Christian!
>
> TWO:  Your ideas of a sexual "standard" are, in fact, NOT standard
> among those who claim to be Christian.  I would submit that even
> those whom you think are so chaste, are really NOT as they appear!
>
> >The homosexual Christians I have spoken
> > to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace same
> > sex
> > behaviour.
>
> ...unlike the so-called heterosexual-Christains who simply DO IT in
> private while claiming chastity to the public.
>
> >My original point was that change programs may be
> > appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a faith
> which
> > does not accept homosexual acts.
>
> Again, THAT would be a good idea IF those "change programs"
actually
> produced change...which none have been able to prove so far!!!
>
> Your comments sound spiritual but time has proven that they do not
> reflect the real world.
>
>
> =======
> =====
> ====
> ===
> ==
> =

nyguy wrote:> It took me quite some time to realize the teaching was
>not biblical and one can only come to such a conclusion if the few
>passages that are used to condemn all same-sex relations are taken
>out of their proper context.
..............................................................

I realize I am an intruder on this board and therefore will not go
into a detailed discussion of Biblical passages, anyway you've heard
them all before.  But I would like to say that I think there are
several areas of argument (1)the specific references;  (2)the
positive expression of male-female sexuality;  (3)the silence
regarding approval of homosexuality; (4)the symbolism of Christ and
His Bride.    I am aware there are alternative views on all of these
aspects, but to dichotomize those who agree with you as "strong-in-
faith", and those who disagree as "weak-in-faith", seems to be
evading the issue.  Not all Bible students who hold that homosexual
behaviour is sinful can be categorized in this way.

In your comments on Romans 14, you expressed the opinion that
Christians do not have to follow rules and regulations.  I think Paul
is specifically stating that the rules and regulations contained in
the Law of the Old Testament are no longer applicable.  He is further
saying that the following of rules does not save us.  However, can we
then dispense with "rules" (ie guides to right behaviour)?  Which of
Paul's "rules" in Romans 13 do not apply to us today?

I agree with you that it is sad for people to think they have to be
straight to follow Christ. But there are "rules" about sexual
behaviour which includes chastity, adultery, and same sex acts.
It is important to remember, however, that breaking a "rule" does not
separate us from the love of Christ.
Ken
.............................................................

--- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> What do I offer those people who cannot accept homosexuality as
> God's will for their lives?  First of all, I don't believe anyone
> should be forced to violate their consciences.  That would not be
> healthy on any level and, according to the apostle Paul, it would
be
> sin.
>
> In and around Romans 14, Paul addresses a church embroiled in
> disputes and controversies over behavior and lifestyle.  The church
> is made up of Christians he sees as "weak-in-faith" and Christians
> who are "strong-in-faith."  He clearly identifies himself among
> the "strong."  He sees the "weak-in-faith" as those who are less
> able or willing to trust in God's grace alone, without adding
> restrictive rules and regulations about diets and days as
> requirements for proper Christian lifestyle.  Such a person is "at
> heart still a legalist [and] believes that he can gain God's favor
> by doing certain things and abstaining from others," says William
> Barclay.  Paul does not regard these rules and restrictions as an
> expression of faith as such.
>
> In Paul's day, one of the biggest controversies in the church was
> over laws about observing diets and days.  In our day, perhaps the
> biggest controversy is over homosexuality.  The "weak-in-faith"
> today add restrictive rules against any and all expression of
> homosexuality as a requirement for Christian lifestyle.
> The "strong" today do not insist on adding such rules and
> regulations and they better understand the freedom that Paul said
> Christians have in Christ.
>
> Paul says that the stronger Christians should welcome the less
> mature into the fellowship.  And he says the "strong" should
welcome
> them without doing so only to argue and force them to change their
> views.  In Paul's day, the "weak-in-faith" was in the minority.  In
> our day – so far as homosexuality is concerned – the
"weak-in-
faith"
> is the majority.  And according to Paul, the majority should not
try
> to use its power position to impose its view on the minority.  In
> our day, that means that the antigay Christians should not force
> Christian gays and lesbians to adopt an antigay doctrine or else
> find themselves excluded from the fellowship.  Of course, the
> opposite is true too.  The broad-minded minority should not
practice
> aggression against the narrow-minded majority.  Paul's view is that
> the liberty of the Christian assembly should be able to embrace
> divergent views and practices without a feeling that they must be
> resolved or that a common mind must be achieved on every point of
> disagreement.
>
> Today, most Christians don't get upset over what others eat or what
> they do on Sundays.  Today, Christians are much more likely to get
> upset over homosexuality.  So lest anyone think that issues of diet
> and days in those days are not analogous to gay issues today, we
> must be reminded of the extreme importance of the dietary laws and
> the Sabbath commandment for Jews of that early period.  The dietary
> laws are clearly set forth in the Torah (Lev 11:1-23; Deut 14:3-
> 12).
>
> Now remember that required Sabbath observance was the subject of
one
> of the Ten Commandments of the Law of Moses.  And Jesus had said
> that not one jot or one tittle of that Law would pass away (Matt
> 5:18).  And that Sabbath commandment was rooted in creation (Gen
2:2-
> 3; Exod 20:8-11) no less than antigay evangelicals root mandated
> heterosexuality and antigay theology in the creation of "Adam and
> Eve, not Adam and Steve."  It must have seemed to traditionalists
of
> Paul's day that he'd turned his back on scripture and had gone
> hopelessly heretical.
>
> So for those people who cannot accept homosexuality as God's will
> for their lives I say they should obey their consciences but keep
> their eyes, ears and heart open.  I too once believed homosexuality
> in any way, shape or form was sin, against God's will, and against
> the clear teachings of the Bible.  That is what I had been taught.
> It took me quite some time to realize the teaching was not biblical
> and one can only come to such a conclusion if the few passages that
> are used to condemn all same-sex relations are taken out of their
> proper context.
>
> But then again, over the years people have been taught and found
> proofs in the Bible that the world is only 6,000 years old, that
> slavery is God-ordained, that women and blacks should not be
allowed
> to vote, that interracial marriage is wrong, that women should
> neither preach not wear lipstick, and on and on.  The Bible verses
> that once footnoted these notions are all still in the Bible.  But
> most Christians have changed their minds about these matters.   My
> prayer for people who cannot accept their sexualty and/or learn to
> express it responsibly is that these "weak-in-faith" believers can
> eventually become "strong-in-faith."  I know that many people need
> to learn to put together a theologically conservative Christian
> faith with their own or other person's homosexuality.  I find it
> quite sad to see people spend their entire lives thinking they have
> to become straight to follow Christ and/or to be more acceptable to
> themselves and the people around them -- especially with no
credible
> evidence that gay people ever become straight. I'm here (as are
> others) to help in whatever ways I can.
>
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > nyguy, that was a very moving post.  Shame can be a destructive
> > emotion.  With regard to your first issue, What does the Bible
> really
> > say, I don't intend to ear bash you with my beliefs except that I
> do
> > know gay men who have examined both sides of the Scriptural
> arguments
> > and still cannot accept homosexuality as God's will for their
> lives.
> > What do you offer these people?
> >
> > Many heterosexual people make the assumption that ALL gays are
> wildly
> > promiscuous, just because SOME are.  Do you think you could be
> making
> > a similar generalization about the rationale & effectiveness
> > of "change ministries"?
> >
> > As for the definition of "change", I think that is a very
> interesting
> > area:  Change?  Reduction?  Control?  And change in what ...
> > Orientation?  Behaviour?  Thinking?  There are many alternatives,
> and
> > when a group emphatically states that they have the one and only
> > answer, I think its approach is questionable.
> >
> > I usually avoid personal examples in a debate but, hey, rules are
> > made to be broken, right?   At an earlier stage of my life I was
> what
> > some would call a 6 on the Kinsey scale; my behaviour included
> > being "wildly promiscuous" as well as having two LTRs.  Today I
am
> > married with children.  Do I still experience same sex urges ...
> > occasionally.   Am I a happy man ... YES.  I am reluctant to use
> > personal experiences because it is not my intention to imply that
> > everyone will make the same journey.  It is one example, that's
> all.
> > Ken.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > What do you mean by "appropriate?"  And more importantly,
> wouldn't
> > > the "appropriateness" of these programs heavily depend on (a)
> how
> > > one defines "change" and (b) whether they can actually deliver
> on
> > > the "change" they offer and promise?
> > >
> > > It appears there are two issues that repeatedly come up on this
> > > board but tend to get mixed and obscured together.  One has to
> do
> > > with what the Bible REALLY does say, and not say, about
> > > homosexuality, and consequently whether the need to "not accept
> > > homosexual acts" is really biblical and a required tenet of the
> > > Christian faith.  Surely, increasing numbers of respected
> > > theologians and biblical scholars are saying it is not.
> > >
> > > The other issue, and the one I'm prepared to make some comments
> on
> > > in this post, has to do with the safety and effectiveness of
> > > these "ex-gay" and "change" ministries, i.e. does "change"
> actually
> > > take place in that gay people really become "ex-gay?"  Even Bob
> > > Davies, the former Exodus national director himself recognized
> the
> > > need to look at this more closely when he announced in a press
> > > release: "...we need to re-examine other issues [including] our
> use
> > > of terms such as 'healing' and 'change'."  [Chairman
Disciplined
> > for
> > > Gay Bar Visit; 10/3/00]
> > >
> > > What are the factors that cause people to seek out one of
> > > these "change" ministries in the first place?  Gay people
> generally
> > > grow up feeling "different from" and "less than" their non-gay
> > > counterparts. They're often made to feel they do not measure up
> and
> > > are often told they
> are "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "shameful,"
> > > etc. for a variety of reasons including their unasked for
> > > orientation.
> > >
> > > Although there is both healthy and unhealthy shame, unhealthy
> shame
> > > can bring such lowered self-esteem that one can begin to fear
> > > looking into the face of others.  Shame can be a terrible blow
> to a
> > > child's tender selfhood.  It makes a child feel unacceptable
and
> > > dirty as well as being rejected.  Shame can also lead to
> isolation
> > > because of feeling so alone and looked down upon by everyone.
> It
> > is
> > > difficult to be rational when shame comes because the person
> feels
> > > so humiliated.
> > >
> > > This painful feeling can begin through many sources: The
> continual
> > > put-down, mocking or name calling by family members or peers;
> the
> > > acts of molestation, rape or incest; the awkward feeling of
> being
> > > socially inept, not knowing what to say; having acne or a large
> > nose
> > > or ears or feet and being made fun of for these; being told you
> are
> > > shameful because of being overweight or for wetting the bed;
> being
> > > beaten or slapped regularly; being continually criticized;
being
> > > disgraced in front of class for an inability to learn;
> humiliated
> > in
> > > front of friends by parents; being unable to play ball as young
> > boy;
> > > being made to feel you can't do anything right, etc.
> > >
> > > These are the people who seek out "change" ministries.
> Moreover,
> > > many people who have experienced this unhealthy and unwarranted
> > > shame do not have selfhood or support enough to let the shame
go
> > and
> > > grow from the experience.   And unlike many who are not gay,
> there
> > > often are no healthy and helpful support systems in place to
> help
> > > them deal with any of this in a healthful way.  Where
> heterosexual
> > > kids often have inherent support from their families, their
> > > churches, from society at large and enjoy legal support for
> their
> > > partnerships, etc., gay people more often than not have none of
> > > this.
> > >
> > > This may be why some gay people as you implied, attempt make up
> > some
> > > of their own rules.  After all, to live as a gay man, you have
> to
> > > break one of the biggest rules of all just to join up.  Even
> very
> > > little boys know that they're supposed to get married to a girl
> > when
> > > they grow up.  After realizing that doesn't apply to them, a
lot
> of
> > > people start calling all the rules into question.  And instead
> of
> > > having the selfhood or support enough to let the shame go and
> grow
> > > from the experience they continue to re-live the shame, and
> shame
> > > seems to become who they are.  The feeling is so devastating
> that
> > it
> > > is often taken as an identity.  No longer does shame remain, "I
> > feel
> > > shame," but it becomes "I am shameful."   From that false sense
> of
> > > identity they tell themselves, "I am disgusting," "I am
> > > sickening," "I am pitiful," I'm a sick faggot," "I don't
deserve
> to
> > > live," etc.   These are the life experiences that drive someone
> to
> > > seek out a "change" ministry in the first place.
> > >
> > > "Healing" may take place in some of these ministries in that
one
> > can
> > > learn to develop a more healthful self-image and be "healed"
> from
> > > some of the feelings of shame, such as:
> > >
> >
>
feeling "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "pitiful," "sickening," "inept
> > > ," "not good enough" -- and a slew of other things so many of
> these
> > > people were made to believe about themselves.   But "change"
> > > ministries that define, offer or promise "change" as a change
in
> > > orientation -- which is certainly the case with most of them --
> > have
> > > caused much more devastation than they have caused healing when
> > > people come to realize they do not become hertosexual.  When
> people
> > > are made to feel that becoming straight is the only way by
which
> > > they can become more acceptable to themselves and to the people
> > > around them you can begin to see how desperately one would need
> to
> > > cling to this false hope.   Perhaps its time that the people
> > causing
> > > all of these poor wounded souls to feel they must "change"
their
> > > orientation to become acceptable are the ones who really need
to
> > > start changing.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > > > No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually chosen.
> It
> > is
> > > > difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual
> > > Christians
> > > > I
> > > > know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour -
eg,
> > > > chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> > > > separated or divorced, etc.  The homosexual Christians I have
> > > spoken
> > > > to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to embrace
> same
> > > > sex
> > > > behaviour. My original point was that change programs may be
> > > > appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a
faith
> > > which
> > > > does not accept homosexual acts.

Ken: <<IN YOUR COMMENTS ON ROMANS 14, YOU EXPRESSED THE OPINION THAT
CHRISTIANS DO NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW RULES AND REGULATIONS.>>

Your paraphrasing of my post is not at all accurate.  I never made
such a hard and fast generalization.  As I've said here many times,
I have a very high view of Scripture and take it quite seriously.
Consequently, what the Bible has to say about homosexuality -- or
any other issue for that matter -- is of high importance to me.  I
do not believe nor have I ever stated that all rules, regulations
and principles governing the Christian faith are simply to be
discarded.  However, I do believe legalism should be.  And
apparently so did Paul, as that is exactly what his discourse in and
around Romans 14 centered on.

Ken: <<BUT THERE ARE "RULES" ABOUT SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR WHICH INCLUDES
CHASTITY, ADULTERY, AND SAME SEX ACTS.>>

Yes, there are very definitely "rules" (if you like that word)
concerning sexual behavior, adultery and the like.   Throughout the
Bible we find many instructions to shun sexual immorality and seek
the highest moral standard that reflects the Spirit of Christ (e.g.
Rom. 13:11-14; 1 Cor. 6:13-20 and 7:1-3; Eph. 5:1-5; Col 3:5-17, to
cite a few examples).  However, the fact that the violation of
others is strongly condemned does not mean that all homosexual
behavior warrants such censure any more than all heterosexuals are
to be condemned for their sexual behavior by association with the
sins of pedophilia, lust, rape, fornication or adultery.  As I've
said before the few verses in Scripture that proscribe sexual union
between men all seek to address sins of idolatry, rebellion, self-
indulgence, abuse, or grossly irresponsible behavior.  None refer to
gay or straight people, who love their partners, are faithful to
them and who shun sexual immorality, according to biblical
definitions.  (We can examine and discuss the requisite passages one
by one, if you like.)

Sexual immorality is never defined in the Bible in terms of genital
acts -- a particularly redactionist way of thinking that divorces
sex from its relational context in our modern sex-obsessed world.
On the contrary, the term "sexual immorality" as used in Scripture
always is associated with adultery, reckless self-indulgence or
social and personal irresponsibility.  It should also be noted that
the Bible's teaching on sexual immorality was also given to a people
who saw nothing wrong with polygamy -- a practice we would consider
grossly immoral today.

And concerning chastity, nowhere in Scripture is celibacy demanded
for those who are unable to marry.  In fact the word is never used
in Scripture.  The only references to the concept of celibacy come
from Jesus and Paul, who refer to the "renunciation" of marriage as
a free choice (Matthew 19:12 and 1 Corinthians 7:1,7).  Indeed, it
would seem that the requirement of celibacy for the unmarried (as
opposed to the wisdom of abstinence) is not God's law, but a
doctrine of man.  Let us heed the warning of Jesus (see Matthew
passage further down) when he confronted the Pharisees for
nullifying God's law.

Despite repeated claims of the "change" ministries, God's primary
concern is not to change the sexual orientation of gay people, to
bring them in line with social norms, but to help them become secure
in Him, assured of His love and acceptance and set apart to follow
Him faithfully and responsibly.   On the contrary, Jesus gave a very
severe warning of the dangers of adopting a Pharisaic attitude in
our ministry to others.  Perhaps some of the change ministries need
to take it to heart.

In Matthew 23, Jesus warned:
"Woe to you Pharisees, you hypocrites! ... You load men's backs with
burdens that are impossible to bear and do not lift a finger to help
them ... Woe to you Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom
of heaven to men's faces.  You yourselves do not enter, nor will you
let those enter who are trying to.  Woe to you, teachers of the law
and Pharisees, you hypocrites!  You travel over land and sea to win
a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as
much a son of hell as you are.  Woe to you blind guides! ... You
strain out a gnat but swallow a camel."

My experience and personal testimony is that God meets us as we are
now.  When we come to Him, He takes our needs seriously (our
relational needs as well as all others) in a very down-to-earth and
practical way.  Jesus did not offer long-term counseling.  He called
people to follow Him, to trust Him, to receive the Holy Spirit, and
to learn to love one another.

And this human longing and God's very own given need for intimacy
has been recognized and recorded from the beginning of time when God
expressed his concern for Adam, because it was not good for man to
be alone -- and that was even in paradise in unbroken relationship
with God!  I think our sin today is that we have failed to show
Christ's compassion for those unable to marry -- for the sake of
man's traditions.   Let us also remember Jesus was not crucified for
maintaining the religious status quo.  Quite the opposite, as a
matter of fact.


--- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> nyguy wrote:> It took me quite some time to realize the teaching
was
> >not biblical and one can only come to such a conclusion if the
few
> >passages that are used to condemn all same-sex relations are
taken
> >out of their proper context.
> ..............................................................
>
> I realize I am an intruder on this board and therefore will not go
> into a detailed discussion of Biblical passages, anyway you've
heard
> them all before.  But I would like to say that I think there are
> several areas of argument (1)the specific references;  (2)the
> positive expression of male-female sexuality;  (3)the silence
> regarding approval of homosexuality; (4)the symbolism of Christ
and
> His Bride.    I am aware there are alternative views on all of
these
> aspects, but to dichotomize those who agree with you as "strong-in-
> faith", and those who disagree as "weak-in-faith", seems to be
> evading the issue.  Not all Bible students who hold that
homosexual
> behaviour is sinful can be categorized in this way.
>
> In your comments on Romans 14, you expressed the opinion that
> Christians do not have to follow rules and regulations.  I think
Paul
> is specifically stating that the rules and regulations contained
in
> the Law of the Old Testament are no longer applicable.  He is
further
> saying that the following of rules does not save us.  However, can
we
> then dispense with "rules" (ie guides to right behaviour)?  Which
of
> Paul's "rules" in Romans 13 do not apply to us today?
>
> I agree with you that it is sad for people to think they have to
be
> straight to follow Christ. But there are "rules" about sexual
> behaviour which includes chastity, adultery, and same sex acts.
> It is important to remember, however, that breaking a "rule" does
not
> separate us from the love of Christ.
> Ken
> .............................................................
>
> --- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > What do I offer those people who cannot accept homosexuality as
> > God's will for their lives?  First of all, I don't believe
anyone
> > should be forced to violate their consciences.  That would not
be
> > healthy on any level and, according to the apostle Paul, it
would
> be
> > sin.
> >
> > In and around Romans 14, Paul addresses a church embroiled in
> > disputes and controversies over behavior and lifestyle.  The
church
> > is made up of Christians he sees as "weak-in-faith" and
Christians
> > who are "strong-in-faith."  He clearly identifies himself among
> > the "strong."  He sees the "weak-in-faith" as those who are less
> > able or willing to trust in God's grace alone, without adding
> > restrictive rules and regulations about diets and days as
> > requirements for proper Christian lifestyle.  Such a person
is "at
> > heart still a legalist [and] believes that he can gain God's
favor
> > by doing certain things and abstaining from others," says
William
> > Barclay.  Paul does not regard these rules and restrictions as
an
> > expression of faith as such.
> >
> > In Paul's day, one of the biggest controversies in the church
was
> > over laws about observing diets and days.  In our day, perhaps
the
> > biggest controversy is over homosexuality.  The "weak-in-faith"
> > today add restrictive rules against any and all expression of
> > homosexuality as a requirement for Christian lifestyle.
> > The "strong" today do not insist on adding such rules and
> > regulations and they better understand the freedom that Paul
said
> > Christians have in Christ.
> >
> > Paul says that the stronger Christians should welcome the less
> > mature into the fellowship.  And he says the "strong" should
> welcome
> > them without doing so only to argue and force them to change
their
> > views.  In Paul's day, the "weak-in-faith" was in the minority.
In
> > our day – so far as homosexuality is concerned – the
> "weak-in-
> faith"
> > is the majority.  And according to Paul, the majority should not
> try
> > to use its power position to impose its view on the minority.
In
> > our day, that means that the antigay Christians should not force
> > Christian gays and lesbians to adopt an antigay doctrine or else
> > find themselves excluded from the fellowship.  Of course, the
> > opposite is true too.  The broad-minded minority should not
> practice
> > aggression against the narrow-minded majority.  Paul's view is
that
> > the liberty of the Christian assembly should be able to embrace
> > divergent views and practices without a feeling that they must
be
> > resolved or that a common mind must be achieved on every point
of
> > disagreement.
> >
> > Today, most Christians don't get upset over what others eat or
what
> > they do on Sundays.  Today, Christians are much more likely to
get
> > upset over homosexuality.  So lest anyone think that issues of
diet
> > and days in those days are not analogous to gay issues today, we
> > must be reminded of the extreme importance of the dietary laws
and
> > the Sabbath commandment for Jews of that early period.  The
dietary
> > laws are clearly set forth in the Torah (Lev 11:1-23; Deut 14:3-
> > 12).
> >
> > Now remember that required Sabbath observance was the subject of
> one
> > of the Ten Commandments of the Law of Moses.  And Jesus had said
> > that not one jot or one tittle of that Law would pass away (Matt
> > 5:18).  And that Sabbath commandment was rooted in creation (Gen
> 2:2-
> > 3; Exod 20:8-11) no less than antigay evangelicals root mandated
> > heterosexuality and antigay theology in the creation of "Adam
and
> > Eve, not Adam and Steve."  It must have seemed to
traditionalists
> of
> > Paul's day that he'd turned his back on scripture and had gone
> > hopelessly heretical.
> >
> > So for those people who cannot accept homosexuality as God's
will
> > for their lives I say they should obey their consciences but
keep
> > their eyes, ears and heart open.  I too once believed
homosexuality
> > in any way, shape or form was sin, against God's will, and
against
> > the clear teachings of the Bible.  That is what I had been
taught.
> > It took me quite some time to realize the teaching was not
biblical
> > and one can only come to such a conclusion if the few passages
that
> > are used to condemn all same-sex relations are taken out of
their
> > proper context.
> >
> > But then again, over the years people have been taught and found
> > proofs in the Bible that the world is only 6,000 years old, that
> > slavery is God-ordained, that women and blacks should not be
> allowed
> > to vote, that interracial marriage is wrong, that women should
> > neither preach not wear lipstick, and on and on.  The Bible
verses
> > that once footnoted these notions are all still in the Bible.
But
> > most Christians have changed their minds about these matters.
My
> > prayer for people who cannot accept their sexualty and/or learn
to
> > express it responsibly is that these "weak-in-faith" believers
can
> > eventually become "strong-in-faith."  I know that many people
need
> > to learn to put together a theologically conservative Christian
> > faith with their own or other person's homosexuality.  I find it
> > quite sad to see people spend their entire lives thinking they
have
> > to become straight to follow Christ and/or to be more acceptable
to
> > themselves and the people around them -- especially with no
> credible
> > evidence that gay people ever become straight. I'm here (as are
> > others) to help in whatever ways I can.
> >
> >
> > --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > > nyguy, that was a very moving post.  Shame can be a
destructive
> > > emotion.  With regard to your first issue, What does the Bible
> > really
> > > say, I don't intend to ear bash you with my beliefs except
that I
> > do
> > > know gay men who have examined both sides of the Scriptural
> > arguments
> > > and still cannot accept homosexuality as God's will for their
> > lives.
> > > What do you offer these people?
> > >
> > > Many heterosexual people make the assumption that ALL gays are
> > wildly
> > > promiscuous, just because SOME are.  Do you think you could be
> > making
> > > a similar generalization about the rationale & effectiveness
> > > of "change ministries"?
> > >
> > > As for the definition of "change", I think that is a very
> > interesting
> > > area:  Change?  Reduction?  Control?  And change in what ...
> > > Orientation?  Behaviour?  Thinking?  There are many
alternatives,
> > and
> > > when a group emphatically states that they have the one and
only
> > > answer, I think its approach is questionable.
> > >
> > > I usually avoid personal examples in a debate but, hey, rules
are
> > > made to be broken, right?   At an earlier stage of my life I
was
> > what
> > > some would call a 6 on the Kinsey scale; my behaviour included
> > > being "wildly promiscuous" as well as having two LTRs.  Today
I
> am
> > > married with children.  Do I still experience same sex
urges ...
> > > occasionally.   Am I a happy man ... YES.  I am reluctant to
use
> > > personal experiences because it is not my intention to imply
that
> > > everyone will make the same journey.  It is one example,
that's
> > all.
> > > Ken.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In exexgayministry@y..., nyguy_1225 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > > What do you mean by "appropriate?"  And more importantly,
> > wouldn't
> > > > the "appropriateness" of these programs heavily depend on
(a)
> > how
> > > > one defines "change" and (b) whether they can actually
deliver
> > on
> > > > the "change" they offer and promise?
> > > >
> > > > It appears there are two issues that repeatedly come up on
this
> > > > board but tend to get mixed and obscured together.  One has
to
> > do
> > > > with what the Bible REALLY does say, and not say, about
> > > > homosexuality, and consequently whether the need to "not
accept
> > > > homosexual acts" is really biblical and a required tenet of
the
> > > > Christian faith.  Surely, increasing numbers of respected
> > > > theologians and biblical scholars are saying it is not.
> > > >
> > > > The other issue, and the one I'm prepared to make some
comments
> > on
> > > > in this post, has to do with the safety and effectiveness of
> > > > these "ex-gay" and "change" ministries, i.e. does "change"
> > actually
> > > > take place in that gay people really become "ex-gay?"  Even
Bob
> > > > Davies, the former Exodus national director himself
recognized
> > the
> > > > need to look at this more closely when he announced in a
press
> > > > release: "...we need to re-examine other issues [including]
our
> > use
> > > > of terms such as 'healing' and 'change'."  [Chairman
> Disciplined
> > > for
> > > > Gay Bar Visit; 10/3/00]
> > > >
> > > > What are the factors that cause people to seek out one of
> > > > these "change" ministries in the first place?  Gay people
> > generally
> > > > grow up feeling "different from" and "less than" their non-
gay
> > > > counterparts. They're often made to feel they do not measure
up
> > and
> > > > are often told they
> > are "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "shameful,"
> > > > etc. for a variety of reasons including their unasked for
> > > > orientation.
> > > >
> > > > Although there is both healthy and unhealthy shame,
unhealthy
> > shame
> > > > can bring such lowered self-esteem that one can begin to
fear
> > > > looking into the face of others.  Shame can be a terrible
blow
> > to a
> > > > child's tender selfhood.  It makes a child feel unacceptable
> and
> > > > dirty as well as being rejected.  Shame can also lead to
> > isolation
> > > > because of feeling so alone and looked down upon by
everyone.
> > It
> > > is
> > > > difficult to be rational when shame comes because the person
> > feels
> > > > so humiliated.
> > > >
> > > > This painful feeling can begin through many sources: The
> > continual
> > > > put-down, mocking or name calling by family members or
peers;
> > the
> > > > acts of molestation, rape or incest; the awkward feeling of
> > being
> > > > socially inept, not knowing what to say; having acne or a
large
> > > nose
> > > > or ears or feet and being made fun of for these; being told
you
> > are
> > > > shameful because of being overweight or for wetting the bed;
> > being
> > > > beaten or slapped regularly; being continually criticized;
> being
> > > > disgraced in front of class for an inability to learn;
> > humiliated
> > > in
> > > > front of friends by parents; being unable to play ball as
young
> > > boy;
> > > > being made to feel you can't do anything right, etc.
> > > >
> > > > These are the people who seek out "change" ministries.
> > Moreover,
> > > > many people who have experienced this unhealthy and
unwarranted
> > > > shame do not have selfhood or support enough to let the
shame
> go
> > > and
> > > > grow from the experience.   And unlike many who are not gay,
> > there
> > > > often are no healthy and helpful support systems in place to
> > help
> > > > them deal with any of this in a healthful way.  Where
> > heterosexual
> > > > kids often have inherent support from their families, their
> > > > churches, from society at large and enjoy legal support for
> > their
> > > > partnerships, etc., gay people more often than not have none
of
> > > > this.
> > > >
> > > > This may be why some gay people as you implied, attempt make
up
> > > some
> > > > of their own rules.  After all, to live as a gay man, you
have
> > to
> > > > break one of the biggest rules of all just to join up.  Even
> > very
> > > > little boys know that they're supposed to get married to a
girl
> > > when
> > > > they grow up.  After realizing that doesn't apply to them, a
> lot
> > of
> > > > people start calling all the rules into question.  And
instead
> > of
> > > > having the selfhood or support enough to let the shame go
and
> > grow
> > > > from the experience they continue to re-live the shame, and
> > shame
> > > > seems to become who they are.  The feeling is so devastating
> > that
> > > it
> > > > is often taken as an identity.  No longer does shame
remain, "I
> > > feel
> > > > shame," but it becomes "I am shameful."   From that false
sense
> > of
> > > > identity they tell themselves, "I am disgusting," "I am
> > > > sickening," "I am pitiful," I'm a sick faggot," "I don't
> deserve
> > to
> > > > live," etc.   These are the life experiences that drive
someone
> > to
> > > > seek out a "change" ministry in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > "Healing" may take place in some of these ministries in that
> one
> > > can
> > > > learn to develop a more healthful self-image and be "healed"
> > from
> > > > some of the feelings of shame, such as:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
feeling "disgraceful," "dishonorable," "pitiful," "sickening," "inept
> > > > ," "not good enough" -- and a slew of other things so many
of
> > these
> > > > people were made to believe about themselves.   But "change"
> > > > ministries that define, offer or promise "change" as a
change
> in
> > > > orientation -- which is certainly the case with most of
them --
> > > have
> > > > caused much more devastation than they have caused healing
when
> > > > people come to realize they do not become hertosexual.  When
> > people
> > > > are made to feel that becoming straight is the only way by
> which
> > > > they can become more acceptable to themselves and to the
people
> > > > around them you can begin to see how desperately one would
need
> > to
> > > > cling to this false hope.   Perhaps its time that the people
> > > causing
> > > > all of these poor wounded souls to feel they must "change"
> their
> > > > orientation to become acceptable are the ones who really
need
> to
> > > > start changing.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Ken" <aussie6112@h...> wrote:
> > > > > No, I don't think homosexual orientation is usually
chosen.
> > It
> > > is
> > > > > difficult to speak in general terms, but the heterosexual
> > > > Christians
> > > > > I
> > > > > know allow their faith to dictate their sexual behaviour -
> eg,
> > > > > chastity before marriage,  unable to remarry if they are
> > > > > separated or divorced, etc.  The homosexual Christians I
have
> > > > spoken
> > > > > to seem to have reconstructd their Christian faith to
embrace
> > same
> > > > > sex
> > > > > behaviour. My original point was that change programs may
be
> > > > > appropriate for homosexual Christians who still retain a
> faith
> > > > which
> > > > > does not accept homosexual acts.