In his critique of the book and the NARTH review, Sheesholtz:
- questions the timing of Byrd’s review — the book was published in March, but it was not reviewed until July 5 amid the Love In Action media circus;
- interprets the book’s call for patient freedom in choosing therapies as a defense of the right of patients to be misled and ripped off;
- wonders whether the authors and Byrd would support a patient’s right to set therapeutic goals if the patient sought a reparative therapist’s help to become more homosexual rather than less.
Of Exodus International, Sheesholtz says, “it provides another example of what happens to health care in a theocracy. … In the American theocracy [that] Exodus advocates, religious dogma cobbled together by power-hungry fanatics takes precedence over everything else, including science, common sense, reality and their own history.”
I agree with the book’s sentiment that there’s a bit too much social activism going on in professional circles — but it seems to me that the activism is coming from all sides, not just those who affirm individuals’ pre-existing sexual orientation.