Shouldn’t the graph numbers be (at least) doubled? He said “thousands,” “tens,” “hundreds.”
Somehow Chambers reminds me of a certain other guy who liked to pull numbers out of his ear. As Time magazine put it in a 1951 article (https://tinyurl.com/dlaxw):
“[Joseph] McCarthy’s jump from obscurity to the national limelight began [on 2/9/1950], when he made a speech in Wheeling, W. Va. He said: ‘I have here in my hand a list of 205, a list of names made known to the secretary of state as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.’ Next day in Salt Lake City, he declared: ‘I hold in my hand the names of 57 card-carrying Communists’ working in the State Department. Ten days later, on the Senate floor, he cited 81 ‘cases,’ particularly ‘three big Communists.’ Said McCarthy: ‘While there are vast numbers of other Communists with whom we must be concerned, if we can get rid of these big three, we will have done something to break the back of the espionage ring within the State Department.’
“….
“McCarthy, who had said that he ‘held in his hand’ the names of 205 Communists then in the State Department, did not give the Tydings committee the names of 205. He did not give it the names of 57. He did not produce the name of even one Communist in the State Department.
“Logically, that failure might have been expected to end the rocketing flight of Joe McCarthy. That it was a beginning, not an end, is partly explained by McCarthy’s personality. Another man, humiliated by failure to produce evidence he said he held, would have retreated and wiped a bloody nose. McCarthy, who was a boxer in college, says: ‘I learned in the ring that the moment you draw back and start defending yourself, you’re licked. You’ve got to keep boring in.’ This is not necessarily true of either boxing or politics — but Joe McCarthy thinks it is true.”
I wonder if Chambers is doubling or quadrupling his numbers by counting each time a person becomes ex-gay, ex-exexgay, and ex-exexexexgay (i.e. John Paulk)?
Afterall, if sexual orientation is so changeable, then it can be changed back-and-fourth. Maybe one person can be counted as finding freedom 52 times a year (Friday night: “I’m gay”; Sunday morning: “I’m ex-gay!”; etc.).
I love the infographic. However, is Exodus really funded by Focus on the Family? I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a financial connection, but I wasn’t aware it was established.
I know chambers thinks he’s doing God’s will, but he overlooks the self hatred he still has and seperates himself fr that by calling himself ex-gay. If more homosexuals could embrace themselves lovingly, the rest would be a breeze. The ex-gay movement encorages self-hatred that is already in place or no one would be at their meetings.
I know a number of gay couples in healthy long term relationships, because they’ve rejecyed the garbage so freely given by wack-o Christians, probablt dealing with their own monsters of self-hatred.
If Chambers wants to torture himself & lie about his sexuality, let him. Even if he needs to campaign for the movement representing them all over the place, real men & women will just have to stand up to him & speak the truth, dismissing the lie that God doesn’t want anyone to be gay. It’s always seemed a blessing to the huuman race, to me. It curtails over population. And we don’t need anymore discussion on the pros & cons of that. It just affords the world a break. Praise God.
This is funny as heck. Love the shoes.
Thanks, Dan.
hehe. love it, dan.
Thanks, this clown really needed his own infographic. Could you guys send copies to Exodus and the fringe media groups cited.
Shouldn’t the graph numbers be (at least) doubled? He said “thousands,” “tens,” “hundreds.”
Somehow Chambers reminds me of a certain other guy who liked to pull numbers out of his ear. As Time magazine put it in a 1951 article (https://tinyurl.com/dlaxw):
“[Joseph] McCarthy’s jump from obscurity to the national limelight began [on 2/9/1950], when he made a speech in Wheeling, W. Va. He said: ‘I have here in my hand a list of 205, a list of names made known to the secretary of state as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.’ Next day in Salt Lake City, he declared: ‘I hold in my hand the names of 57 card-carrying Communists’ working in the State Department. Ten days later, on the Senate floor, he cited 81 ‘cases,’ particularly ‘three big Communists.’ Said McCarthy: ‘While there are vast numbers of other Communists with whom we must be concerned, if we can get rid of these big three, we will have done something to break the back of the espionage ring within the State Department.’
“….
“McCarthy, who had said that he ‘held in his hand’ the names of 205 Communists then in the State Department, did not give the Tydings committee the names of 205. He did not give it the names of 57. He did not produce the name of even one Communist in the State Department.
“Logically, that failure might have been expected to end the rocketing flight of Joe McCarthy. That it was a beginning, not an end, is partly explained by McCarthy’s personality. Another man, humiliated by failure to produce evidence he said he held, would have retreated and wiped a bloody nose. McCarthy, who was a boxer in college, says: ‘I learned in the ring that the moment you draw back and start defending yourself, you’re licked. You’ve got to keep boring in.’ This is not necessarily true of either boxing or politics — but Joe McCarthy thinks it is true.”
(Emphasis added.)
I wonder if Chambers is doubling or quadrupling his numbers by counting each time a person becomes ex-gay, ex-exexgay, and ex-exexexexgay (i.e. John Paulk)?
Afterall, if sexual orientation is so changeable, then it can be changed back-and-fourth. Maybe one person can be counted as finding freedom 52 times a year (Friday night: “I’m gay”; Sunday morning: “I’m ex-gay!”; etc.).
I love the infographic. However, is Exodus really funded by Focus on the Family? I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a financial connection, but I wasn’t aware it was established.
Norm!
I can’t help but notice that by 2005 the chart bar has become unmistakeably condom-shaped and erect. Chambers has a clear passion for his work.
I know chambers thinks he’s doing God’s will, but he overlooks the self hatred he still has and seperates himself fr that by calling himself ex-gay. If more homosexuals could embrace themselves lovingly, the rest would be a breeze. The ex-gay movement encorages self-hatred that is already in place or no one would be at their meetings.
I know a number of gay couples in healthy long term relationships, because they’ve rejecyed the garbage so freely given by wack-o Christians, probablt dealing with their own monsters of self-hatred.
If Chambers wants to torture himself & lie about his sexuality, let him. Even if he needs to campaign for the movement representing them all over the place, real men & women will just have to stand up to him & speak the truth, dismissing the lie that God doesn’t want anyone to be gay. It’s always seemed a blessing to the huuman race, to me. It curtails over population. And we don’t need anymore discussion on the pros & cons of that. It just affords the world a break. Praise God.