As you may have read recently, NARTH has received a lot of criticism over the callous advice of one of their committee members, Joseph Berger, M.D. Their response seems to consist of private comments of disapproval followed by a stealth edit of the original article. Of course, the problem statement was a quote from Joseph Berger so an edit seems rather deceptive. There is no mention there that the material has been changed, or that they have any problem with what it originally said. So why was this quote perfectly fine with them yesterday – they published it on their site after all – and now it is not?
The highlighted section is the part that was edited out. You can view the entire edited article here, providing no more of it dissolves away in the night. You can also view the full Google Cached version of the page before edit here. The graphic above was derived from this cached version.
UPDATE 9/1/2006:
Earlier today NARTH pulled the article discussed above entirely, reference and all. There is nothing there to indicate it was ever posted. They also pulled an entire thread from their blog which contained the same Joseph Berger quote from the article. In the blog section, there is now a comment about their having pulled the post. While we are glad NARTH has taken some action, we don’t think this was enough in light of the nature of the comments, do you? Read over the thread for possible alternatives and add your own thoughts.
Gender issues and Canadian weather aside for the moment, what kind of parent would consider letting their kid go to school in their UNDERWEAR? For that matter, they probably wouldn’t even be allowed on the bus or through the door in nothing but a pair of Hanes.
This guy’s certified grade A for ass.
You know, the many lies and deceptions of the Ex-Gay sector could make a whole blog in itself…..
…what kind of parent would consider letting their kid go to school in their UNDERWEAR?
That would probably get the attention of child protective services all right. But you have to figure Berger puts them in that “various interfering, ignorant, and biased busybodies” category. Its only child abuse, if a homosexual does it. Imagine what they’d be saying right now about a news report that a same sex couple had let their kid go to school in their underwear as a way of teaching them a lesson.
Berger certainly isn’t the only one there who has no conscience when it comes to children. What Berger said someone, possibly a lot of someones there at NARTH, had to read before it got onto their website. What’s telling is that nobody saw anything wrong with any of it until sites like this one and Wayne Besen’s started pointing it out. It’s really hard to present a compassionate face to the rest of the world when you don’t have a shred of compassion.
[Blog Entry] I am not a spokesman for NARTH…Joseph BergerNARTH BlogsAugust 31, 2006
Empahsis added. There is more of his response at the link, currently down near the webpage’s bottom.
Ok, someone please explain to me how both these statements can be true:
Joseph Berger comments:
I suggest, indeed, letting children who wish go to school in clothes of the opposite sex — but not counseling other children to not tease them or hurt their feelings.
On the contrary, don’t interfere, and let the other children ridicule the child who has lost that clear boundary between play-acting at home and the reality needs of the outside world. Maybe, in this way, the child will re-establish that necessary boundary.
Joseph Berger back peddle:
I am not in favour of what is called teasing. I deal with that issue in the office regularly and explain that so-called ‘teasing’ always carries an element of hostility that is being covered up by supposedly turning it into a ‘joke’ so that the victim cannot react with offense.
Do words mean anything now or have we truly crossed the boundary into Newspeak? And did anyone catch his comments about the awful tolerance in sunny areas?
Tolerant parents, tolerant schools, tolerant societies, might let them get away with it. No one should be surprised that avant-garde California or sun-drenched Florida should be places where the tolerance is highest.
Yes, you read that correctly, Joseph Berger associates geographic areas exposed to more sunshine with avant-garde tolerance that will presumably be the ruin of all society.
Brought to you by NARTH, the makers of real mental health. And remember, stay in those shady states folks!
We left this at the NARTH blog. It, of course, will never see the light of day. Except here. Or maybe Warren’s blog.
Interesting, but David Blakeslee’s comments already appear to have not passed the “protect against malicious comments” test… well, that’s NARTH for ya David.
—
Joseph Berger you are a disgrace. I read the original version of your vomit and, as with most others, was utterly disgusted.
That was not a “professional opinion”. It was a callous call to allow the abuse and bullying of a child. There is no science, let alone empathy or understanding, behind your view — it was nought but pure spite and/or stupidity.
I’m not even going to bother pretending with your complaining about now being name-called over this. Frankly sir, you deserve it. Completely. And I hope all your professional collegues let you know their opinions in no uncertain terms. How dare you now complain when you advocated far worse treatment being delivered onto a child.
Gather some dignity. Apologise. Without reservation.
It’s gone. Dead. Killed. Shot and buried.
September 1, 2006
Entry pulled on “gender variant” children
We have pulled the discussion on gender variant children in Oakland. The article contained comments that were deemed offensive to many readers and failed to accurately express the overall views of the physician who expressed them.
We apologize for publishing the article without getting proper clarifications first about how children with gender identity disorders should be treated by parents, teachers, and counselors.
Jeez NARTH… why start now with such concerns???
Pffttt!!!
I think the problem was that the article actually did “express the overall views of the physician who expressed them”.
And they were nasty.
Oh, and like: “We don’t treat disordered fantasies with mutilating surgery.” as a blanket condemnation for the well established treatment regimen for GID is a professional opinion.
Uffff!
Grantdale said:
I think the problem was that the article actually did “express the overall views of the physician who expressed them”.
Exactly. And did you notice that some commenters posted what appeared to be astoundingly clear and brutal versions of just what NARTH is selling on this subject? The people in the proverbial pews were parroting back the nonsense without a filter – not good.
Besides, it was too difficult to deceive readers when the blog had a complete copy of the unedited quote and the site carried it with some of the offending bits mysteriously missing. I feel like I need another shower.
Well David, join me under the deluge.
Urgh, no don’t. Putih get upset.
Apologise me. Putih is nickname. Short for Orang Putih. Because he very much is. And why do I sound like this when I get off the phone from friends in Jakarta?! (That’s because you have the vocab and syntax of a 2 year old Indonesian child. But perfect pronunciation. For someone from Yogya…)
But speaking of filters — yes it appeared they let through all the supportive comments but none of the condemnation. And the exclusions included those negatives from NARTH people.
Berger “explanation” stood out like a shag on a rock, considering there were no criticisms before him! I mean, who was he supposed to have been responding to???
“We have pulled the discussion”.
Yes, they pulled the discussion. But they didn’t pull Berger’s rant; they just amended it and removed the most obviously cruel portions to make it more palatable.
It’s hardly admirable to say (in essense) “Our article was offensive so we have removed the criticism”.
So the article has been pulled, which was the right thing to do (its reference has not been erased…that is: the statement and apology appear on the blog). Not as quiet as David Roberts first concluded (correctly, I would say).
The ethics of posting blog comments on the NARTH cite needs to be modified…it is undertsandable to screen for obcenities and rants. Quite another to screen criticism on both sides of the issue, from NARTH members and others.
Blogs are about discourse and feedback. When they work well, good information is augmented and it creates great information; bad information is exposed and our overall intelligence grows. I regret that bad information got out, but that is part of what a blog is all about: getting information into the virtual universe and seeing what comes back. We all grow.
BTW, I do believe that in the orginal post there were five comments, two on one side of the issue and three on the other. That is to say a filter was in place that permitted dissent.
My chronology on this has Throckmorton and Gonzales in the lead…but you all may know better how it all came to pass. Integrity and truth keep us all accountable.
Thanks again,
David Blakeslee
More changes.
Entry pulled on “gender variant” children
We have pulled the discussion on gender variant children in Oakland. The article contained comments that were deemed offensive to many readers and failed to accurately express the overall views of the physician who expressed them.
We apologize for publishing the article without getting proper clarifications first about how children with gender identity disorders should be treated by parents, teachers, and counselors.
NARTH President Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D. has issued the following statement related to gender variant children and remarks made by Dr. Joseph Berger:
“NARTH disagrees with Dr. Berger’s advice as we believe shaming, as distinct from correcting, can only create greater harm. Too many of our clients experienced the often life-long, harmful effects of peer shaming. We cannot encourage this.”
The above is now on the NARTH site.
David Blakeslee
David Blakeslee,
No the article has not been pulled; two paragraphs have been removed. The ideas in it are still offensive and put children in danger… it just is doesn’t sound as dramatic.
But I do agree with you that the value of blogs is that – when used correctly – they allow for the presentation of the greatest amount of viewpoints and reasoned positions.
Getting the balance between allowing only one-sided propaganda and letting in everything including insults and trolls is a very difficult task. I think we’ve been very fortunate on XGW to have Mike set a standard that allows dissent and debate without chaos.
And I couldn’t agree more with your statement that “Integrity and truth keep us all accountable.”
Oh how I wish that was the view of everyone at NARTH.
Thanks for your comments David.
Considering the particularly odious nature of all of this a more comprehensive explanation and apology was called for in my opinion, one that preserved the original article. This would have been intellectually honest. Apologies and position statements could then be attached to clarify.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they did something, but one could see this change of heart as less than sincere to say the least and self-serving at worst. And one wonders how long the mention that is there will remain. You see, this is the problem when one’s reputation is sullied by manipulating criticism (I experienced this myself on some very tame posts in the Narth blog) and removing material that becomes embarrassing.
However, if there are those who are part of NARTH who believe in honesty and integrity, we will be listening. In the end however, actions tell the tale the loudest.
Oh David, Gonzales — pfft, nowhere. There is no “Speedy” in front, notice???
Think Warren was the first to go live. Mid afternoon 29th Aug. We responded 20 minutes later — but had previously spotted and downloaded and read said page before that post. Hence quick snippy response.
(Please people, do not image happy dance at this moment. Over our dead bodies do we happy dance. Ever. Serious.)
But Gonzales, oh EXCUSE me… 31 Aug… Certainly the first here, but, yeah, sooooo?
Hand that 2nd place ribbon to us now!
—
David — any guesses if we two do or do not have any gender confusion about being male?
And sorry “Speedy”. Old bad childhood joke, I guess, we know 🙂
The article has been pulled, in its entirety (sp?). The blog also has been pulled and a statement in it’s place now stands.
As your original posting about the blog notes, this is a 21st century process for NARTH…we are still learning the protocol for it all.
Sounds like if you had made an error, you would have kept the posting live, printed an apology and kept the blog active. I kind of like that idea. I have noticed that when you all make a misstatement or the status of some comment changes, you mark through the comment and keep the post active. I like that kind of transparency, and will make the strong suggestion that we do so in the future.
Berger’s comments encouraging ridicule of GID children is so troubling I think it deserves censure and a corrective statement by NARTH.
David Blakeslee
David — this protocol is well established. It is nothing fancy. Scientific journals will only publish in this following way, as example:
> If it’s an opinion piece, it stands. For ever. You may add. Or apologise. Or retire to Fiji.
> If it is information, it may be replaced.
All NARTH articles, or here, are opinion pieces.
Bus timetables are information.
Problem cases: people who think their unfounded opinions are information.
“As your original posting about the blog notes, this is a 21st century process for NARTH…we are still learning the protocol for it all.
Sounds like if you had made an error, you would have kept the posting live, printed an apology and kept the blog active. I kind of like that idea. I have noticed that when you all make a misstatement or the status of some comment changes, you mark through the comment and keep the post active. I like that kind of transparency, and will make the strong suggestion that we do so in the future.”
With all due respect, David, I’m not sure why the concept of transparency is so foreign to NARTH. It seems logical to me—and I would dare say anyone who finds integrity and honesty to be of the utmost importance—that transparency is the ONLY acceptable way to proceed.
Your comment strikes me the same way Alan Chambers’ comment about terminology and honesty a few posts ago strikes me–as fairly hollow and disingenuous. Has NARTH never had to deal with material–on the blog or in other media–that did not require a tactful revisit? Knowing the type of bombast that comes from NARTH, I would hardly think this is the first time. So why have you not learned before now that transparency is vital to integrity? After all, the practice of striking out retractions is pretty standard across the board.
Methinks that, caught in a no-win situation for NARTH, you’re trying to do your best not to look like the dishonest and disingenuous group you really are. Like Mr. Chambers in that previously mentioned post, you talk the talk, but you rarely walk the walk.
It is simple to create categories for eachother that justify polarizing positions, but not much rapproachment.
I am interested in the latter and think I have transparently demonstrated my efforts to correct a wrong that we both agreed about.
If you need now to return me to a category that fits your experience, so be it.
David Blakeslee
Mr. Blakeslee:
There isn’t really a “protocol”, David. Just good honest repentance would do from NARTH. Just treating other people (and their kids) the way you would want others to treat you.
Something like “OOPS, we really blew this one! We are SO sorry. One of our members said something very stupid and unChristian, we strongly disagree with him and have asked him to apologize as well.”
I don’t really care about the proper computer “protocol”. I care about how God’s little ones (innocent “gender variant” kids) are treated.
Joseph Nicolosi should have had the wisdom and compassion to never have printed such an article on his official webpage in the first place.
There has been no apology from Dr. Berger, just whining that people are mad at him and calling him names. If memory serves me, Jesus had some rather choice names for self-righteous, judgemental religious leaders of His day — and very little patience for those who harm Children. (Check the book of Matthew for his comments about “millstones” and “oceans”.)
I have little reason to believe that David Blakeslee is anything but a man of integrity. He has been polite to me in the past, and demonstrated integrity in the current situation.
On the other hand, I’ll admit room for skepticism among commenters. Dr. Blakeslee has on occasion participated in Focus on the Family propanda; he and Warren Throckmorton have made comments about comprehensive sex education in suburban Washington, D.C., that a local parents group felt were highly uninformed; and he has praised transgender research by J. Michael Bailey that has been criticized as rigged and unprofessional by mainstream experts.
It’s pretty obvious from this site that several XGW authors (including me) consider Drs. Nicolosi and Berger guilty of persistent unethical conduct and immoral and anti-Christian beliefs.
However, I will not assume without evidence that Dr. Blakeslee or other individual NARTH members are anything but sincere individuals trying to help people with unwanted sexual temptations.
Unfortunately, I feel that such individual doctors and counselors are very poorly served and informed by NARTH and its affiliated religious-right spin machine. NARTH leadership seems to be answerable to no apparent code of ethics; it suppresses dissent; it discourages interaction and debate with the targets of their clinical claims; and its official communications (written presumably by Nicolosi or his handlers) convey factual sloppiness, unclinical cynicism, and smug paternalism toward same-sex-attracted strugglers and their parents, friends, teachers, and therapists.
We’d agree with that Mike A.
And I think it is clear that David Blakeslee, on this occassion, was/is both concerned and upset that the article even appeared on the NARTH site (a wrong that was compounded by someone/s over at NARTH attempting to bluster and hide their way out of that poor decision to publish an abusive article.) David responded correctly, and we don’t need to ponder motivation etc to recognise that.
Having said that, as the old saying goes: a man is known by the company he keeps. More than a few people here — let alone the professional community itself — have little doubt that the views expressed by Berger are not an aberation within NARTH. There is a nasty, wilfully ignorant streak running through the organisation; starting at the top, with Nicolosi.
And, surely, there does come a time when one needs to question being part of an organisation that has a notorious record around presenting any rubbish provided it takes an anti-gay line, and a parallel record around refusing to openly allow anyone to rebut that nonsense. It’s the sort of behaviour that points to an obvious insecurity within NARTH about the subject they claim expertise on. Anything that confirms that nasty, wilfully ignorant streak running through the organisation of course runs contray to the social and political motivation behind NARTH and many?/most?/near all? of it’s membership.
So, they hide it.
Sidenote for David B: there have been a few times when “you” has been used in comments here and elsewhere that I read as referring to NARTH, but you may think means “you” (personally). Not sure if we have done that, not even going to check, but we’re happy to make a blanket apology if we have not been clear enough about who “you” is. You, of course, may not speak on behalf of NARTH but some comments have obviously been seeking you to explain the behaviour of NARTH etc.
For the record, what happened to get this story public is as follows: On August 28th, I checked the NARTH blog, and found the statement by Dr. Berger regarding the Sunday Article by the San Francisco Chronicle. I forwarded contents of the blog to several GLBT news organizations, and I awoke on August 29th with a message from PinkNews editor/writer Marc Shoffman requesting statements about the comment regarding ridiculing gender variant children. I contacted Dan Gonzales here at Ex-Gay Watch, and from him received both an Ex-Gay Watch Statement, and contact info for Dr. Drescher. I then also contacted Wayne Besen and for a statement. I assembled a media release from the Transgender Community Coalition (TCC) of San Diego, and sent it to various LGBT news organizations. I sent the press release to PinkNews specifically at 12:19 PM PST. Before I sent the press release to PinkNews, Dr. Warren Throckmorton made his first comment on his blog about the Dr. Berger comments. On the morning of the 30th, Wayne Besen contacted me, asking if the TCC had released the press release (I had sent him a pre-release draft on the 29th). I told him I didn’t publish it online (at somewhere like PRWEB), but I did send it out to various LGBT news organization. Wayne made a decision then that Truth Wins Out should send out it’s own press release because he felt like me — the Dr. Berger statements needed wider distribution / publicity. Later on the 30th, PinkNews posted their story, and then Dan Gonzales publicized the PinkNews article on Ex-Gay Watch. I then sent links of the Ex-Gay watch Post, the then released Truth Wins Out press release, the PinkNews article, and Dr. Throckmorton’s thread on the story to Pam (of Pam’s House Blend). Pam picked up the story. I don’t know who’s picked up on the story in the blogosphere since. I also posted the Truth Wins Out press release, as well as both the NARTH article – blog releases by Dr. Berger at five transgender news groups, and five GLBTQI news groups. The combined readership of the groups is about 5 to 8 thousand people. I know some of the stories were then forwarded to Canada’s EGALE main discussion thread, as Dr. Berger is Canadian. In other words, transgender people were made aware of the original comments by Dr. Berger. I know some contacted NARTH specifically because I ensured transgender people were aware of what was on NARTH’s website. grantdale was key in connecting all the threads from the Ex-Gay Watch, Dr. Throckmorton’s blog, and NARTH’s morphing article, and keeping the comments fresh and relevant of on Dr. Throckmorton’s Blog. My computer was down for most of the 1st, so the story went on without me — as it should have. Suggesting that the bullying of gay and/or gender variant children is a desirable thing should be news that captures the attention of the whole community of GLBT people. I’m a GLBT news archivist, and a transgender activist. I went through therapy with Dr. Galen Larson in the late 1970’s which I believe now would now be described as reparative therapy — I didn’t go for being gay, but I went to reparative thearpy was because I’m transgender. As this dust up with NARTH clearly shows, NARTH not only ‘cares’ about gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, but it’s definitely ‘cares’ about transgender people as well. NARTH has a whole section of articles on gender identity disorders.Exodus cares too — just check out Exodus International ministry Reality Resources‘ section on gender identity, and the Exodus website’s article Gender Identity; What Does This Have to do With Homosexuality? — a part of their Youth Manual.I hope thread commenter’s here at XGW pick up on something very clearly (as I know the blog’s management already does): The “formerly identified as gay” movement encompasses the “formerly identified as transgender” too, and just as gay people are in the sites of “ex-gay’s” and reparative therapy promoting organizations, transgender people are in the sites of the same people and organizations as well.
Obviously you don’t use bullying to cure transsexualism and homosexuality. How silly is that? You use sand:
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3298039,00.html
My gawd Autumn — you can actually keep track of all that!!!
And for her next trick, Autumn will add up all the collective “electron miles” of the posts 🙂
—
Boo — doesn’t say if it worked. But did have a chuckle: “I was desperate, my wife cheated on me with a l.e.s.b.i.a.n.”
No dear. Your wife cheated on you with another woman. Your wife is actually The Lesbian… (and your son sounds like a complete doofus.)
“Boo — doesn’t say if it worked. But did have a chuckle: “I was desperate, my wife cheated on me with a l.e.s.b.i.a.n.””
Mayeb the l.e.s.b.i.a.n. was a D.E.B.
grantdale, it’s amazing how much energy one will put into an issue when one really cares about it. 🙂 I care about what formerly-identified-as-gay and reparative-therapy-advocating organizations say about transpeople; I care about bullying in school. Mix those two concerns together, and I REEEEEEALLY care. :)I’m glad NARTH backtracked as much as they did. It shouldn’t have taken them better part of a week to retract the statement, but hey — at least they did remove the article less than a week after publishing it, and left a public retraction statement, indicating that NARTH doesn’t support shaming children (for both their proponents and critics to read on their blog).
I noticed that neither Nicolosi or Chambers have called on Dr. Berger to take back his comments or to resign from the NARTH advisory Board.
If this had happend while I was on the EXODUS Board many years ago, the man would be GONE — too much of a public embarassment to keep on any advisory panel. Note to Alan Chambers and Dr. Nicolosi:
You are known by the company you keep.
I thought you might like to know that Dr. Throckmorton is referring to all of this as “the Berger Debacle”. Understated, don’t you think?
Well, I just got a public response on the NARTH website from “sojourner” — apparently the person who decides whose comments get posted and whose do not. I have vigorously objected by phone and email to Dr. Berger’s article. I admit it. I HAVE been relentless.
Up until now, they have been unwilling to post anything I have sent.
Here is the explanation: “Michael, if you would stop attacking people and naming names, I would put your comments on the blog. You are blaming one person (Dr. Nicolosi) when in fact he had nothing to do with the situation. When he did find out about the article on the blog, he told the people in charge of the website and blog, to correct the problem.”
Questions: Why didn’t Nicolosi know about the article? Who did? Who is responsible for posting it in the first place? Have they been reprimanded? Isn’t NARTH Joe’s baby? Isn’t NARTH his organization? Is he so out of touch with what his own organization is doing and saying? NARTH accuses me of “intimidation” when their own advisor suggests mistreating kids? Then NARTH gets mad when I strongly object? If they can’t take it, maybe they shouldn’t dish it out.
Going on, Soujourner accuses me of “bullying and agressive behavior.” Really? Who suggested we tease and ridicule kids? Dr. Berger did. It was posted on Nicolosi’s website.
Sojourner accuses me of being a “gay activist”. OK. I will accept the label. Even though I am not a member of any gay organization, I am gay and I do take action when the line is crossed. Berger and Nicolosi crossed it.
Sojourner then advises me to “just take a breath, calm down and get control of your anger”. Easy for Sojourner to say. As a kid, was Sojourner teased and ridiculed by “normal” schoolyard bullies on an almost daily basis?
Was Sojourner stabbed in the back by young men yelling “faggot”? Did sojourner’s best friend bleed to death of five stab wounds in the back by those same bullies?
So if the “sissy” (me) finally stands up and says a LOUD and ANGRY “NO” to bullying (NARTH), then the sissy is a bully? What are we supposed to do, grin and bear it?
Here’s more from “Sojourner” over at NARTH:
“Michael,
Dr. Nicolosi is the president of Narth and highly respected in the field. However Narth is not his organization. Narth has many leaders, members, world class researchers and mental health professionals.
Yes, mistakes were made in posting the article. We have removed it and Narth has stated we do not approve of bulling or shaming those with homosexual issues, children or adults.
You need to get over it and stop being a victim. In fact, you have become the perpetrator not the victim. Your actions of constant telephone calls and emails has, crossed the line to abuse. It is not uncommon for the victim to subconsciously, changes roles and become the bully. Perhaps getting some therapy for your anger would be helpful.
Many men who have same sex attraction, and appear rather feminine have suffered from bullying, abuse and worse. I am sorry for what you had to go through and for your friend. This kind of bullying behavior is inappropriate and in some cases criminal.
That being said, many in the field of unwanted SSA, have strong disagreement with the political activities of the Gay activists. We will not back down, from providing information, research and psychotherapy for those who suffer from unwanted homosexuality.”
Question: I agree that therapy can be helpful for “anger” issues, but why would “Sojourner” assume that I appear “rather feminine”? (grin)
Michael, I appreciate the efforts you’ve put into holding NARTH accountable on this. Notwithstanding these statements by Berger NARTH is indirectly responsible for promoting hatred against people who seek to live happily with their same sex attractions. “Sojourner” demonstrates how NARTH’s message that same sex attractions should be rejected creates and reinforces the blind social rejection of LGBTs which justifies to some the violence you experienced. NARTH’s attempts to downplay Berger’s comments ring pretty hollow when they refuse to acknowledge the use and promotion of “reparitive therapy” isn’t compatible with a moral society that allows people the freedom to do whatever they want as long as they don’t hurt others. People only have unwanted same sex attractions because society’s first told them the attractions are unwanted.
I am not really a gay activist. I don’t beloing to any “gay” group. I am just me. And sometimes, I blow it, too. My behavior and tone towards Joesph Nicolosi, Dr. Berger, Alan Chmabers and others HAS been aggressive and mean-spritied at times recently.
I just got off the phone with a dear Christian friend to also urged me to “take a deep breath”. OK, Lisa, here goes… In… OUT…
I have given this much thought and I want to apologize for my agressive and angry tone and behavior towards Dr. Nicolosi and NARTH. I know I cannot combat bullies by becoming one.
I am still deeply troubled by the attack that almost killed me and left my best friend dead. AS you might imagine, my emotions are hard to reign in at times.
Jesus said: “Blessed are they that mourn for they shall be comforted”. I know that this is true.
I also know that I need to heed Jesus’s words: “love your enemies and pray for those who mistreat you”. I have forgiven the gang members who kllled Jeffery.
It may surprise some readers, but I really DO think of Dr. Nicolosi and Alan Chambers as brothers in Christ. Again, I ask their forgiveness and I look forward to metting both men in PLam Springs. WELCOME.