The rumors first posted by Peterson Toscano yesterday have been verified. Josh Morgan, communications manager for Love In Action (LIA), confirmed to XGW this morning that John Smid, president and CEO, has indeed resigned, and that they will release a statement in their monthly newsletter. It will be available online at their website starting April 1st.
LIA has been the subject of much controversy, but they are probably best known to readers for the Zach controversy from 2005, when a teenager was forced by his parents to attend the youth program Refuge after coming out to them at age 16. LIA has since been involved in court battles with the State of Tennessee, and later closed the controversial Refuge program.
LIA maintains that homosexuality is a myth (PDF), and treat homosexual behavior as sin to be conquered, similar to an addiction. As with most such programs, they concentrate on controlling behavior as virtuous, regardless if any change in desire occurs. Stories from some of their past participants are quite upsetting.
LIA is an Exodus member ministry.
I’m pretty sure I’m not a myth.
I know people who are a legend in their own mind, but myth – no.
I am sure they would continue to find every excuse in the world to call homosexuality a myth. Even if we say we know who we are, what we need; they would say we are “cheated by the devil”, or “lying to ourselves”.
Seriously, studying on LIA; I had never seen such forceful attempts to mess up people’s minds and define them according to what LIA want. I find these kinds of behaviour revolting. Especially when they fail to target gays, they “reach out” to their families and friends.
Homosexuality a myth? We used to teach something similar. There was really no such thing as “homosexuality” — just homosexual “temptations”. We were all really heterosexual somewhere deep down inside. For me, apparently, it’s very, very deep.
Of course we’re a myth, look at page two:
I find it odd that a group of non-scientists have come up with their very own non-scientific definition of a scientific phenomenon. The word “homosexual” is a clincal term for a known biological variation.
Would they be able to get away with this :
In other words, if we use scientifically valid arguments, we lose. But if we ignore them, and make up our own, we can do whatever we want!
I’m inclined to agree with Jason. Of course, I’d also note that the lack of an “answer of hope” is only true if you presuppose that same sex love and sex are inherently sinful.
And therein lies the problem of the ex-gay and anti-gay communities: That one assumption is absolutely central, and everything else has to molded to fit it and/or cast it in a desirable light. The mutability/non-biological causes of homosexuality is no longer a search of truth, but a doctrine that must be upheld lest a God who would condemn a gay person (whether that condemnation be hellfire or a life of lovelessness and loneliness) should be seen as capricious. (Of course, some of us would consider such condemnation capricious even if sexual orientation was mutable, but hey.) Love between people of the same sex must be denounced as “not real” for similar reasons.
I do hope his resignation is due to burnout or some other personal decision to move on. I really do hope that his resignation isn’t due to some scandal that we will find out about later on.