Important update, May 8, 2005: Read here.
In Southern Voice (Dec. 10), Gareth Fenley comments on the exgay video "I Do Exist," developed by Warren Throckmorton. A showing was hosted by exgay activist Darryl L. Foster in Atlanta earlier this fall.
The movie is called “I Do Exist,” and it makes no mention that successful identity changes based on religious convictions are rare, nor does it tell us the truth that ex-gay ministries cause great harm to many people, including some suicides. It only talks about five happy people who say they are now straight.
"I Do Exist" was created by psychology professor Warren Throckmorton, who works at the conservative Christian Grove City College. He often teams up with another psychology professor, Mark Yarhouse, director of the Institute for the Study of Sexual Identity at Regent University.
Extensive interviews with Yarhouse present him in the movie as a neutral scientific researcher. Throckmorton doesn’t tell you that Regent University was founded by Pat Robertson.
Fenley comments on Foster’s literature:
The screening I attended was hosted by the LifeLines Discipleship Program, which enrolls African Americans and is headed by an ex-gay, Pastor Darryl L. Foster.
The brochure for LifeLines declares that “homosexuality cripples and distorts an individual’s relational, emotional and decision-making abilities.” These lies are followed by discussion of “deliverance to restorative wholeness,” but Foster is careful to make no promises. The purpose of the program, he says, is not heterosexuality, but holiness.
Fenley concludes with an observation on an exgay minister who blames patients for the persistent failures of their therapists — and views the patients as spiritually disposable losers:
I asked another ex-gay ministry leader in attendance if this really works.
He smiled and said it is important for all people to know that they can run the race, and if even one makes the finish line, it is a great victory for God.
I don’t know about him, but I care about the people who can’t finish this race.
According to tradition, so did Jesus of Nazareth.
Well Mike:
I’ve read your site a couple of times now, and I’m still not sure where you stand on the exGay issue.
I compared the movment to AA in a previous comment, and those in denial explained in detail why I was wrong.
I still think the comparison, though not perfect, has some validity.
Most alcoholics don’t believe there is anything wrong with drinking. Thus they don’t wish to quit.
I don’t think that it is my place to tell them it’s wrong. As the matter of fact, my income would be smaller if they all quit drinking.
I do know that Jesus loves them, and wants to heal them, and can heal them.
I let them know that I love them. But I wouldn’t let them serve drinks to my teenager.
Sorry Mike, my bad:
I just reread your agenda statement, under “about me” and I think I see where you stand.
Pardon my uniformed opinion. I did not know there was an exGay community that required watching.
I am aquainted with AA, they labled me a program failure. I haven’t had a drink in well over ten years, but I was uncooperative with their program, I didn’t think it was religious enough.
So here I am. I read your site, the topic is interesting to me. I pray that understanding can be fostered.
I’m not a supporter of gay rights. I don’t see the differnce between gay behavior and petophilia, except that it is between consenting adults. It is still a sexual compultion that is tolerated because of the number of participants.
Trust me, I’ve had my problems with sexual compultions. But, I don’t give in to them, and the less I dwell on them, the less frequent they become.
I advize seeking Christ. In all things.
Pops, I am an Irish-American, on my mother’s side, who was raised Roman Catholic. As you know, alcoholism is a common failing in the Irish-American community.
My maternal grandfather was an alcoholic who made his wife and children’s lives horrible. He beat them, neglected them, spent $$ for food and bills on booze, and then got on his moral high horse and refused to speak to my father or any of his family because they were not Roman Catholic.
His eldest son, my uncle, also was an alcoholic, and married an alcoholic. They had 6 children, of which all 6 have had addiction issues. Their third child, who was openly gay, died at age 40 after a life of alcohol and cocaine addiction. His eldest brother awaits a liver transplant to save his life because of his own alcohol and cocaine addictions; he is not yet 50 and unlikely to ever get the transplant. Two of their sisters have been in rehab, one after giving birth to a cocaine-addicted child.
I cannot tell you how horrible it is watching this family continue to fall apart because of these addictions, which I firmly believe are rooted in their genetics. Their problems are now being passed on to another generation.
None of that mess in any way, shape or form is similar to my life as an openly gay man. Being openly gay has not interferred with my ability to achieve success with my career, to become financial stable, to contribute to my community, to be a good son, brother and uncle. In fact, my life was falling apart until I made the decision to come out.
Even when an alcoholic is in denial, and refuses to see the damage being done to their lives, those who love them can see how horrible their lives really are. My family, friends, and co-workers, on the other hand, continue to remark about how happier I am, how much more relaxed, how much better a friend I am, since I have come out.
Pops, once again, you are wrong about alcoholism. Many, many alcoholics know that the alcohol is bad for them.
As far as pedophilia, you state there is little difference between it and homosexuality. But then you state the clear difference–it is between consensual adults, like heterosexuality. That is a big difference.
Again, gay people are individuals–some are happy, some are depressed, but it is not the sexuality that determines temperment.
It’s tempting to jump into this denial argument, but most of it (from Pops’ point of view) is based on an assumption that being gay is sinful, a premise I do not adopt, for reasons that are entirely adequate to me and 100% spiritually defensible. I only ask myself one question: Which do you believe more? The word of a minister who doesn’t know you personally? Or the blinding white light of the Living God you have experienced directly for yourself? The latter experience has made it clear to me that being gay is not a problem.
But what I really wanted to comment on is this question:
How is it that we can honor the experience of those who claim to have made a change in their sexual desires through prayer without creating a pattern that demands the same of ALL gay people?
Just as I believe that there is a small percentage of humans who can successfully take a vow of celibacy in the name of their spiritual practice, I believe that there are a few who can alter the focus of their sexual expression.
The problem arises when you attempt to extend the exception to all. I do not believe that God demands this of us.
Nice post, Dave.
I think the ex-gay watch site is right on the money.
I’m sort of shocked to read all this babble about AA, sin and being gay. Being gay never damaged your liver, ruined your health or caused you to beat your spouse in a drunken rage. To top it off no alchoholic ever needed AA who didn’t take a drink.
The only way you frame being gay in context of AA is to declare that all gays should be celibate. And then for what reason? All the answers to this question trace back to religion. It seems lately religidiots are emboldened and are starting to out and out say that gays should be celibate in the name of God.
I suppose they forget all the rules that they are supposed to play by if they want to impose that rule on gays.
*Religidiot is a nice term I picked up denoting extreme religous fundamentalists.