Exodus membership director Randy Thomas’ blog on Thursday identified Exodus’ new spokeswoman: Julie Neils, who was a spokeswoman for Focus on the Family during the John Paulk scandal in 2000 and 2001. Thomas discloses neither this pertinent fact nor whether Focus on the Family continues to employ Neils.
Discussing his trip to visit Neils in Colorado Springs, Thomas discloses the development of a new antigay, religious-right program for U.S. public school systems:
The part I didn’t mention yet was about going to Focus On the Family to discuss the development of a grassroots conference to equip and help communities combat the one sided “gay” activist agenda in the school systems around the country. Scott Davis who is helping to coordinate the conference wrote an article in this months Exodus newsletter (Impact) and I won’t argue or debate this effort here on my personal blog.
And remember, I will delete any comments that are intolerant of those of us who seek to testify of our own lives beyond homosexuality. We will, are and continue to offer help to those with unwanted same sex attraction and it is time school-children learned the truth that same sex attraction doesn’t automatically mean you must become what a politically correct paradigm dictates you have to be. Homosexuality is a condition that if a person chooses to overcome it they can. For many of us we will never buy into any “sexuality” being an innate identity to embrace but instead see it as an expression of intimacy to steward in a way that honors God, our bodies and our one and only opposite sex spouse.
And that is as much a personal “right” of stewardship and belief as a person who chooses to identify as “gay.” The arrogant assumptions of some gay activists that their beliefs are the only true beliefs concerning homosexuality will be challenged in the schools. It’s time.
Thomas’ only evidence that schools promote homosexuality, or that gay people are solely to blame for the exclusion of ex-gays, is a single press release by PFOX that relies upon one 10-year-old quote from the head of GLSEN, Kevin Jennings, opposing exgay politics in the schools.
Instead of quoting Jennings about his reasons for distrusting exgays, PFOX changes the subject and attacks Jennings’ character. PFOX challenges Jennings’ handling — 16 years ago — of a high school student who confided he was sexually involved with an older man. PFOX suggests that Jennings was legally required to report the closeted student to parents and police, but it’s questionable whether modern-day mandatory-reporting laws were in effect in 1988, and public hysteria against homosexuals and youths like Ryan White was at an all-time high in the late 1980s. PFOX offers Jennings no opportunity to defend himself.
Randy Thomas’ own tone is counterproductive. He does not acknowledge that people who disagree with him also honor God. He does not offer to work with a cross-section of concerned parents, students or teachers to promote mutual tolerance of gay and antigay students and faculty in the schools. He does not say that he seeks to reduce antigay bullying. Instead, he lobs a strawman — a "politically correct paradigm" — and vows to thwart equality for gay students before equality somehow destroys Thomas’ agenda.
Thomas says: "Homosexuality is a condition that if a person chooses to overcome it they can." In other words, the majority of exgay program participants who fail to become heterosexual, despite years of effort, are to blame for remaining gay — not the ineffectual programs. Thomas accuses ex-exgays of simply not trying hard enough to be heterosexual. He makes no offer to dialogue with them or learn from exgay ministry mistakes and stereotypes. Thomas instead vows to push exgay-only programs in the schools.
Good post, Mike. I was going to bring up the points you mentioned when reading what Thomas wrote.
I am always saddened by ex-gay groups that claim anyone can become straight if they just try hard enough. It really is a slap in the face to the majority of people that enter into their programs willingly, honestly seeking to change. I guess Thomas just tried harder than all of them.
Or perhaps God loved him more than those who failed?
I really hate those groups that encourage their members to commit fraud on unsuspecting women (or men) their members date/marry. Plenty of straight women have gone through hell with such marriages, I can think of at least 4 personal acquaintances (older women). I sincerely doubt that every ex-gay approaches the potential spouse saying, “I am not sexually attracted to you but am willing to try anyway because you are nice in a sisterly sort of way, and there is no longterm followup study on people trying to change from gay to straight that indicates that my inclinations will ever be any different. “
I sorta take a weird view on that. My own question is if they are no longer gay are they straight or bisexual or something else? I mean how on earth do you present that to a class? You don’t have to be gay if you try really really hard and by the way 80% of the folks didn’t try hard enough? I would think that in just about any other situation any adult would not want to present something that fails 80% of the time to children.
Jason said:
I would make a comparison here to alcoholism.
We should agree that alcoholism is not a healthy or acceptable lifestyle.
Most alcoholics do not wish to change.
Those that do, go to AA.
AA is unsuccessful most of the time.
Some go back again and again.
I think about drinking sometimes, I think about smoking and getting high sometimes too. But by the grace of my Redeeming Savior, I’m smart enough to avoid behaviors which are not good for me.
Jesus is the answer.
I think the difference here is the fact that you can not say being gay is in and of itself unhealthy where as alcholism is.
I didn’t quit drinking because my liver was failing. I quit because my loife was failing.
_
Again the difference being you stopped a behavior that was unhealthy for you. Homosexuality is a bit more than just behavior and it touches upon people’s lives more ways than simply being sober.
Homosexuality is about who/whom you find attractive and fall in love with. Yes sex can be distructive like a lot of behaviors, but the gender of whom you are having sex with or being in love with does not automatically make the relationship or the sexuality healthy.
Pops, there is nothing inherently unhealthy about homosexuality. I have been in a great, healty relationship for 12 years. If anything, our relationship is healthier, happier, and more fulfilling than almost that of any heterosexual couple that we know. And people around us know it. Alcoholism is always a bad thing. Sure, some may be able to cope with it, but it still affects the user poorly. Not so with my relationship. Homosexuality is neutral and depends on the people involved. Same with heterosexuality. You can also predict the outcomes of alcoholics but not homosexuals or their relationships.
The exgays that I have known have had worse relationship problems than any of the gay people I have known.
BTW Alcoholics Anonymous is actually fairly successful in the longrun. Exgay therapies are not, and long term success is not really known for the few who go through these programs.
Alcoholism is not a lifestyle.
And I wish exgay therapists and political activists were more concerned about the frequency of AA’s failures than they seem to be. Among the reasons for the failures, I’d argue, is that AA’s approach — like exgay therapy — often mandates a heartless, unnatural and counterproductive absolutism:
If you are an absolute teetotaller and you submit to the AA/exgay group’s religious ideology, then you are permitted to participate.
If you opt for behavior that differs from the organization’s absolute, then the group has a tendency to kick you aside and label you a failure, doomed to eventual death from runaway alcohol/sex.
Absolutists within both AA and the exgay movement consider moderation impossible or immoral, and they insist upon the surrender of personal responsibility to an external power.
There are some people who have benefited from AA’s approach, and some who feel (at least temporarily) that they have benefited from exgay therapy. But a majority of people are not helped by absolutism and ostracism. That majority deserves to have access to choices that work. I do not feel it is honest, compassionate or responsible for people to be ostracized, condemned, or blamed for the limitations or incompetence of either AA or the exgay movement.
“And remember, I will delete any comments that are intolerant of those of us who seek to testify of our own lives beyond homosexuality.”
Does no one else notice just how 1984 newspeak this is? Those who wish to disagree, or even dialogue, with Mr. Thomas about ex-gay therapy run the risk of being labled “intolerant” and excluded from his dialogue.
This is frightening — if only because such distortion of language in a public forum leads to further distortion and the demise of reasoned debate.