In an article oddly titled First Person – Homosexuality, child sexual abuse, and foster care, Alan Sears, CEO of the Alliance Defense Fund, is riling up the Baptists again with fear mongering about letting gay people adopt. The argument? That gay foster parents are more likely to sexually abuse children.
Here’s how he comes by this:
The results of an Illinois study released in March revealed that 34 percent of child sexual abuse cases by foster parents in the state were committed against children that were the same sex as their molesters.
He quotes Concerned Woman Robert Knight:
“Since one-third to one-half of all child molestations are committed by men against boys, and homosexual men comprise less than 2 percent of the population, this means that the ratio of child molesters among homosexuals is far, far higher than among the rest of the population.”
And, of course, the political outrage:
When pressed, an agency official noted DCFS classifies potential foster and adoptive parents only on their marital status and that “there is no law that says a gay or lesbian person cannot adopt” in Illinois.
Sounds horrible, right? The logical thing would be to ban gay foster parents, right?
Except for one thing. No one has told us if a SINGLE ONE of those kids was molested by an openly gay person. And, rest assured that if there were any known cases of openly gay people molesting foster kids, any where, at any time, AgapePress and Baptist News would have told us in vivid detail.
It is a given that in the vast majority of cases (if not all) in which foster children were molested, it was by a “happily married” person. I doubt that a single case would have been eliminated by banning gay foster parents. In fact, considering the level of screening and follow-up that gay people go through, placing a foster kid with a gay person lowers the odds of molestation.
And Alan Sears and Robert Knight know it. And don’t care.
It’s but yet another example of the deceit propagated by the Christian right.
I am just amazed at the expertise displayed by Sears and Knight on the psychology and physiology of gay people. I should consult them to get to know myself a little better. All sarcasm aside, how is it that these pathetic pseudo-christians are such experts on gays? Why does the media and the government give them so much damn attention and credibility when most of what they say and do are complete lies? They are not even intelligent enough to look at idiot statements such as the “2% of the population, therefore they comprise most of the same sex abuse”. This does not even make sense. I’ve seen that line quoted here in Canada by the Pseudo-Christian Coalition of Canada. It is absurd to state that gays would not be suitable to be foster parents based on this nonsensical data. Timothy, the christian right has tapped into an incredible money maker: gay bashing. Each time they use the gay boogeyman, their bank accounts rise. Even in government, Karl Rove, although he is a despicable crook, was brilliant in rallying voters against the “evil gays” and their threat to traditional “moral values”. Gays are a great money maker. I read some christian quotes from Texans in regards to the upcoming amendment to enshrine christian cruelty against gay families into the constitution. One woman’s comments were especially vomit-inducing in which she lammented that she has gay friends who are “wonderful people” but at the same time heinous sinners because of that “lifestyle”. There is that absurd love the sinner hate the sin BS; this is nothing about love and these SOB’s wouldn’t know love if it stared them in the face. That is the ridiculous mentality of these people and if I had a friend like her, I’d be out of her life so fast she would feel the karma of her betrayal biting her hind end. In summary, there are just way too many “experts” out there about gay people in my opinion. Have they ever thought of some intelligent dialogue with us to find the real answers instead of the likes of Sears, Knight, Dobson et al? I also question why this discussion in the media is always faith based when there is a great part of the population who reject faith and organized religion, such as yours truly.
It never ceases to amaze me how willing people are to accept the fact that adult man-on-woman rape is “about power, not sex,” but then refuse to acknowledge that man-on-child molestation is too.
Since one-third to one-half of all child molestations are committed by men against boys
Say what?
Okay now-this statistic they are giving is either way too one sided or totally wrong. Completely wrong.
94% sex predators against juveniles who were reported, were males.
Right, that could be HETEROSEXUAL males, and on a large percentage of female victims.
Marital status isn’t an indicator of preventing such assaults. The perpetrators are RELATIVES of the victims.
Age is an important factor.
Whether we’re talking pedophilia or ephebophilia, and such.
I know those figures are way off.
Especially the percentage of child sex assaults done by gay men.
It has to be said too, much child abuse reported isn’t necessarily sexual in nature.
But abuse by beatings, starvation and isolation.
There have been many cases recently of foster children placed in what was thought to be ‘religious’ homes, only to find horrendous physical and emotional abuse to the children in their custody.
The homes this most occurs are rigidly maintained by the father and the wife and children isolated from the community and extended family members.
Similar to the situation with LIA/R….religious communes are not nearly so scrutinized as they should be.
Religious discipline doesn’t always translate into being healthy and fair for women and children.
Regan, you bring up an important point that Sears totally misses in his article. That is the many other abuses, besides sexual, that occur in foster care. Abuse is abuse regardless of the sexual orientation of the perpetrator. If one bases efforts to minimize abuse on only the sexual orientation of the perpetrator, one is missing a the greater part of the problem. If Sears was truly interested in “protecting the children”, he would have highlighted the important fact that one cannot tell by looking at a person or by knowing their sexual orientation that that person is likely to abuse a child. My husband and I use the following analogy when this subject is brought up: our brother in law abused and harrassed our neice (from another sibling) for several years and this was disclosed about 2 years ago. This man is a married hetero with children. Now if a given christian family were to come along seeking child care and knew we were gay, they would leave their children in “john’s” care because he is hetero. OF course, my husband and myself are not attracted to children and wouldn’t dream of harming or abusing a child. John on the other hand has a known history and the christian family has just put their child at risk because of their ignorance. This is an important lesson that Sears neglected and sadly, when read by those less aware that gays are human beings and not monsters, will place more and more children at risk. That is something the gay community needs to get out in the mainstream if we are to have a positive effect on stemming the scourge of child sexual abuse and any other heinous abuse.
One other thing I missed in my analysis…
The report said that 34% of the cases in Illinois were committed by persons of the same sex as the children.
Concerned Woman Knight says “one third to one half”. Well, yes, 34 is between one third and one half. Technically correct. But totally dishonest.
Not being content with 1/3 which would at least be accurate (though irrelevant to the rest of his statement) he has to push it and make it sound like half.
“One woman’s comments were especially vomit-inducing in which she lammented that she has gay friends who are “wonderful people” but at the same time heinous sinners because of that ‘lifestyle’.”
I can’t speak for anyone else, but if a “friend” of mine made a statement like that about me, they’d immediately become a former friend who walked away with a black eye or some other souvenir of the former friendship.
I hear this type of statement made frequently in debates like this and just wonder who these “friends” are or if they ever even existed.
Timothy, this is classic, “He quotes Concerned Woman Robert Knight.”
Also, a good analysis of this information. This is Cameronesque logic, and it is amazing how intentionally dishonest some of these guys can be.
That Illinois study IS a study by Paul Cameron. i will have the links later today but that IS a Cameron study. The Wall Street Journal wrote an article on it and refuted the evidence that it presented based on the fact that Cameron did not know the orientation of the perpetrators
In my blog post, Were Priests who Abused Boys Gay?, I discussed this mis-use of data:
If any of you would like to join me at Family Scholar’s Blog, where this comment is also posted and help me knock down this and the other carpola about gays that appears there, I would be delighted.
Brady at October 18, 2005 09:38 AM
Timothy, this is classic, “He quotes Concerned Woman Robert Knight.”
That’s one reason that some of us have started calling them Confused Women In America. CWA has a figurehead female president, but most of their spokespeople seem to be male. More than a few of the latter–particularly as concerns homosexuality–seem to have come from the Family Research Council.
Since one-third to one-half of all child molestations are committed by men against boys, and homosexual men comprise less than 2 percent of the population…
This is a little rhetorical slight of hand I’ve been railing about for some time now. They’re using two different definitions of ‘homosexual’ to get this result. The first definition is the one used by the methodologies of various studies that put the percentage low. So…say two percent of the population is homosexual by that definition. But then they use a different definition of ‘homosexual’ to determine how many cases of child sexual abuse are committed by homosexuals, which goes something like this: whenever a boy is molested by a man, that act is by definition a homosexual act, therefore that man was a homosexual.
Dig it. They use one definition of ‘homosexual’ to get a low figure for our portion of the general population, and another definition that basically says that even so much as one same sex encounter in your entire life means you are a homosexual, to get the figure for the portion of child sex abuse cases where the perpetrator was a homosexual.
It’s too slick to be accidental, or even hysterical. You can’t fudge the numbers like this, without knowing you’re fudging the numbers.
This is deliberate fearmongering. The intent here isn’t to protect children, but to incite hostility toward gay Americans. Hostility which, by the way, trickles down to the lives of gay and lesbian teens.
This one-third statistic seems to be one that originated from “Dr” Judith Reisman, who did a calculation a few years ago for WorldNutDaily and discovered (surprise! surprise!) that one-third of instances of same-sex-sex with underaged males were committed by males (most, but all, of which were adult).
There were several problems with her presentation, however. One, she did not delve further into the adult’s relationship background. She assumed (and you know what that means) that every same-sex sexual relationship that might have been considered a molestation by someone who is homosexual in his (and it usually is a he) adult relationships. That was patently absurd. I won’t go into details (actually, I will) but it is probable that more than a few older-male-on-younger-male sex is initiated by an older male who shows hetero tendencies in his adult relationships.
I’ll illustrate. I was discussing this on a right-wing board a few years ago, and related a case that I knew of. A father molested his son. He also molested most if not all of his daughters. And he also had sex with his wife–which resulted in the producion of the children whom he molested. The conclusion by the right-wingnuts: the father was homosexual because hetersexuals don’t have sex with males. Huh? That’s silly.
On delving further, I discovered some interesting information about Reisman. One, her doctorate is not in statistics or even psychology, it is in communications. Her first claim to fame was as a song writer for the Captain Kangaroo TV show. Her second claim to fame was as a contractor for Ed Meese’s anti-porn committee. (Ed Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general.) Her third claim to fame was that she wrote a book that criticized the Kinsey Institute for employing pedophiles while Kinsey was conducting his studies on male sexuality (which is a common belief among right-wingers). Her fourth claim to fame is that, after the Kinsey Institute denied her allegations, she sued the Institute for libel. Her lawyer pulled out of the case after only a few months, and the case fell apart. In an unusual move, the court awarded the Institute US$50K in attorneys fees, which she has refused to pay. Courts do not award attorneys fees in cases such as this unless the case is totally frivolous.
Thanks for clearing my 11:45am comment. Bill
https://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=546
The above link from the southern poverty law center tells the entire story about the illinois study. It was a Cameron study.
This reminds me of a heinous event that I attended in high school – a sort of public-safety assembly, featuring an officer from our local PD.
The part that sticks in my memory is this uniformed peace officer telling an auditorium full of high-school students that the vast majority of child molestation was adult male homosexuals preying on young boys. So watch out for those male homosexuals, kids!
I challenged him (in a very general way) as to percentages, but he stuck with his assertion. Looks like not a lot has changed in the 25+ years since then.
Robert, here’s what’s even scarier: last year I was enrolled in law enforcement academy here in rural Fla. During the first aid/first responder segment, the local paramedic, who was presenting, gave the 5,000+ sexual partners statistic for gay men. This is a taxpayer funded course for public servants! The year was 2004. My tongue was sore from biting it all day.
Cameron, the thing that refuses to die.
I have read many of Cameron’s “studies” as have many others here I’m sure, as well as references to them from various hate groups. It instills in me a feeling of anger and frustration and wondering why such pandering is even legal. Truth be told, this stuff goes way beyond free speech and if directed at another minority, the outrage would be widespread and heads would roll. Why is it different with gays? Is it because the US government sanctions and encourages homophobia? In Canada, there is not as much anti-gay rhetoric because of our hate crime laws but, “religious” groups produce documents that are false, misquoted and certainly would induce the reader to hate or have contempt for the subject: gays. How do others on this blog feel when they read this stuff and do you actually counter these hateful people face to face or is it only on blogs like these. I would love to do it face to face but have not had the occasion to as yet. What has been the response you got? I got a very long winded regurgitation of Cameron/Dobson/Perkins/LaBarbera all rolled into one disgusting package from the Pseudo-Christian Coalition (hate group) of Canada.
This is the original piece by Cameron:
Quite apart from the fact his tables don’t even add up etc, if you change his deceptive definitions around (ie, by defining anyone who has opposite sex as purely heterosexual) you get a very different result. In fact, the OPPOSITE.Who are all these “Married Homosexual Men”??? anyway — exgays???
raj,Reisman did indeed do a similar “study”. Baptist Press reported on it in 2001. She contributed to a vile (and barely literate) edition of Regent University Law Review in 2002. In that edition, Steve Baldwin makes the same false claims about “homosexual molestation”. You’ll also note Mark Yarhouse’s name (he works at Regent and collaborates with Throckmorton — they frequently quote each other as proof that their own claims are correct…)”Dr” Timithy Dailey of FRC (with a PhD in religion) did a similar “study” making the same claims.And so on and so on…But where did it all start, I hear you all cry???Well, the slur is age old. However most recent efforts can all be traced back to the mid-80s and … da-dah! … PAUL CAMERON and his original pamphlet.Since Paul Cameron is now notorious, he is rarely mentioned by name although his “research” is still quoted by stealth (such as, by Chad Thompson as he goes about loving us as Jesus would… Chad also went on to lie about his use of Cameron right here at ExGayWatch.)Many will instead refer to Satinover, who used Cameron in his 1995 book. Or, as many have done in the past few years, they are rewriting the original Cameron pamphlet and claiming it as their own (see above authors for examples of…)
Not to confuse y’all…The end paragraphs refering to Cameron are meant to be about use of his two main efforts — the “1/3 of Child Molestations are Homosexual” and his “Gay men die at 42 years old” — and how others are hiding the source of the claims.The way I wrote it makes it sound like I’m only talking about his molestation claims.
I’m telling you, plus ca change, plus le meme chose…
Back in the day-the segregation laws were enforced and given huge public support based on ‘criminal stats’ of black male sexuality. The myth of black sexual aggression, prowess, irresponsibility and outsized sexual organs persists to this day.
Of course, gay males (lesbians bear myths to that of black women of the era) suffer similar mytholization of their sexuality and pay dearly. Sometimes with their lives.
It was white males who claimed knowlege and the absolute truth and the greatest insights into black motives, the same way heterosexuals are doing with gays and lesbians.
You read online journals like Townhall, Newsmax, Washington Times and WorldNetDaily on gay people and conservative heterosexual males write with a certainty and conceit that does boggle my mind, that they get away with it.
They are also extremely critical of their gay counterpart’s information, let alone experience.
I can’t understand why anyone isn’t simply asking: you’re not gay, you don’t know any gay people and don’t want to have gay people be open and honest…so therefore, how do you know about gay people what you really don’t want to know?
When I was a little kid I used to drive people crazy asking questions like that.
Back then, I was dismissed as a impudent child.
I still get dismissed with that same condescension and without the question being answered.
But the question remains, and all of us should demand, demand STRONGLY, an answer.
We all here already know the answer.
We’re just looking for a heterosexual with the guts and backbone to be honest enough to say he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
I have tried to tell people that this so called ‘homosexual agenda’ is about equal treatment under the law.
Tim-
“I have read many of Cameron’s “studies” as have many others here I’m sure, as well as references to them from various hate groups. It instills in me a feeling of anger and frustration and wondering why such pandering is even legal. Truth be told, this stuff goes way beyond free speech and if directed at another minority, the outrage would be widespread and heads would roll. Why is it different with gays? Is it because the US government sanctions and encourages homophobia? In Canada, there is not as much anti-gay rhetoric because of our hate crime laws but, “religious” groups produce documents that are false, misquoted and certainly would induce the reader to hate or have contempt for the subject: gays. “How do others on this blog feel when they read this stuff and do you actually counter these hateful people face to face or is it only on blogs like these. I would love to do it face to face but have not had the occasion to as yet. What has been the response you got? I got a very long winded regurgitation of Cameron/Dobson/Perkins/LaBarbera all rolled into one disgusting package from the Pseudo-Christian Coalition (hate group) of Canada.”
Here in the US, free speech is free speech, even if it’s hateful and misleading. Unless Cameron specifically slanders someone, he’s free to say pretty much whatever he wants. In 2003 a psych professor at Northwestern wrote a book wherein he claimed, among other things, that transsexuals are all either biologically programmed to be prostitutes or are lying compulsive masturbators. He backed it up with… pretty much just a bunch of smug assertions. When people started criticizing him he screamed about censorship, and then it came out that he hadn’t bothered to tell the people he was writing about that he was doing research on them and he slept with at least one of them. What he did was absolutely disgusting (he also stated in the book his hope that science would soon find a way to identify gay babies in utero so the gay population could be reduced by selective abortions) but, aside from the unethical conduct in regards to the people he exploited, people like him and Cameron have a right to hold and speak offensive views, and to claim they are science even if there isn’t any good data to back them up. Bad science has to be countered with good science.
My dear Boo,
These very characters you mention are avoiding us who would seriously challenge them.
Their broadcasts involve only people who agree with them. The newsletters and emails and blogs they have eschew any contact or objections to their material.
They very smoothly have taught their phone monitors to ‘thank you for your call’, but open discussions or any discussion is impossible.
They rarely grant interviews on shows that would have another point of view now.
And fewer and fewer gay people are allowed to voice their concerns, even in courts.
Cases are getting booted to other courts, dismissed or avoided altogether.
As you see, student attempts at GSA’s are not easily allowed, to the extent that ALL extracurricular campus clubs are banned.
The more heterosexuals have to face reality, the less they are open to it.
It all points to a MILITANT avoidance of the realities of gay lives and it’s symbiosis with hetero lives.
Dobson and his ilk would rather spend MILLIONS of dollars on anti gay rhetoric.
I don’t mind telling these freaks just that.
Why don’t they spend their money somewhere else?
Like on laws that permanently put away wife and child abusers?
Grantdale- you Chad Thompson link appears to be down. I’d like to see his use of Cameron, though, so if you have an active link, I’d love to see it.
Thanks in advance.
Hi Brady — it appears to be working at the moment.The article was:Banning Gay Marriage Is Not The AnswerChristianity Today, Week of August 30The quote in question is (basically)
The use is particularly unpleasant as the “Christian Reader” is given just the one piece of false research (by Cameron), the origin of the data is hidden, and people are instructed not to repeat this research to “someone who is homosexual” because it will upset us delicate flowers.Well, yes. It’s by Paul Cameron for cripes sake!Unfortunately Chad went on to deny using Cameron while here at XGW. He claimed he was only “throwing it back” (or something) at those who did use him. Nope.. ya used him Chad.
This just pisses me off so much. Pedophilia is like rape, it’s a violation… it’s about power, not about the gender of the child.
And, honestly, if they are serious about this then they should just have single women be the foster parents… what are the stats of sexual abuse there? Probably close to nil. But of course they won’t do that, because it’s really about gay bashing.
The title of this article contains one of the selling points of the religous right on gay bashing and that is the use of ” the children”. By playing on people’s emotions in regards to portraying gays as a threat to one’s children, support for anti-gay rhetoric is easily obtained. When reading various articles, the children reference is quite often used: keeping gay themed books away from the children, keeping positive portrayals of gay families away from the children, ultimately, keeping gays away from the children because they threaten children. As I said in an earlier post, by stereotyping gays as a threat to children, those who pose the biggest threat (most molesters are a parent/step parent, trusted married family friend) are given free reign.
Grantdale
About Cameron, I already told you that you have taken my position out of context but you continue to do so, and even tell people on exgaywatch that I am a liar.
I have not read all of Cameron’s research, but I disagree with most of what I have read. In the CT article quote I said that “some” of these findings are true. I did not get specific about which parts I agreed with and which parts I did not agree with because that was not the point of the article. CT wouldn’t have even let me put that in there, they would have edited it out because that was not the point of the article.
I was quoting Cameron to point out how ridiculous it would be to apply his findings to every single gay and lesbian person. I know you don’t believe me grantdale, you see a sinister agenda behind every word I type, and I don’t really blame you either. I think if I were in your place I would be skeptical towards the ex-gay movement as well.
What’s important is that we continue to seek truth, and that we treat each other with kindness even where we disagree.
By posing gay people as a threat to EVERYTHING, then it’s pretty much enough.
The anti gay want all the bases covered. Even in environments where there are no children (military units) for example, they still support complete segregation of gay people.
They benefit now because gay people’s voices get shouted down. It’s profit, it’s easy.
All other groups, Jew bashing, black bashing, isn’t popular anymore.
The target has changed, but the tactics remain.
They are just a diabolical, illogical and serve no purpose BUT prejudice and fractures the healthy relationships that gay people could otherwise have with family and community.
If you have to break an individual from this vital support to achieve your agenda, it’s inherently evil.
And all the whiny denials that that doesn’t make people against homosexuality bigots, then I demand to know-what else is it?
Chad,
You listed a claim of Cameron, only one, and said some of “these claims” are true. The reader had only one claim to choose from – guess which one they thought was true.
However, for point of argument, let’s stick with your actual words: “I will only say that, while some of the findings in such studies are true,…”
That’s the problem. As best I can tell, NONE of Cameron’s claims are true.
In fact, of ALL the “studies” bandied about by anti-gay activists, very very few are true. (I can’t think of a single one at the moment).
You know better, Chad.
I don’t think you’re an evil vindictive nasty person. I haven’t seen you come up with these bizarre fabrications. But you have the bad habit of acquiescing to evil. When things are said that you know are not true, you say nothing. Or worse, you suggest that they may be true – just not polite or political.
It isn’t good enough to say “let’s be nice”. You have to not repeat the lies. You have to not pretend the lies are true.
Hi Chad,
I have to remind you of something. To even suggest that it’s okay for a person to abdicate their identity, in the face of the traditionally and historically constant and intense coercion involved, is in and of itself far beyond insult.
To say it, EVER, even nicely, implies and infers something else truly evil.
And that is, you’re not worthy of consideration, as a basically equal human being. For that to happen, you have to sacrifice your identity.
This is the constant in gay life.
There is no amount of kindness, compassion or duty to that implication that’s right.
You never addressed my comment that gay people struggle with heterosexual conceit, not homosexuality.
No one is honest about that, and support of abandoning gay identity will HELP that honesty.
I’m sure and know you mean well, Chad.
But the fact remains, what you support has an evil foundation. Kindness cannot be built on it.
You mean well, and you are kind, I’m sure to whoever you meet that’s gay.
To THEIR faces, you’re gentle. To the anti gay, you’re an excuse for their persistant and constant agenda.
And they are using it all the way to the highest offices of government and the judiciary, and so therefore-the ‘struggles’ of gay youth with that hetero conceit is harder.
It’s difficult not to look at you and wonder how you could do what you do and expect us to believe your abilities to deal with changing minds about gay people.
Instead of getting defensive about Cameron or Satinover and how you disagree with most of what THEY’VE said.
I would appreciate you calling me and dealing with the matter of how one is forced to even consider abandoning their identity to the forceful majority heterosexuality?
Satinover and Cameron aren’t here.
But I sure am.
There are parts of you in this general discussion Chad, that IS dishonest.
Very dishonest.
And what gay people need the whole world to know is THEIR truth, not someone else’s dictated to them, as what has happened to you already.
You feeling me yet?
Chad-
You claim that Grantdale took your poosition out of context, but he put the quote in context. The context was not “Paul Cameron is a liar” but rather “Don’t quote Cameron to gay people because it will piss them off.”
As much as you want to claim you are different from all the other ex-gays, you all share the same basic problem: refusal to take responsibility for your own actions.
You claim that Grantdale took your poosition out of context, but he put the quote in context. The context was not “Paul Cameron is a liar” but rather “Don’t quote Cameron to gay people because it will piss them off.”
True, that was the context; but I really do disagree with much of what Cameron has written, and I state this in my book as well as in my DVD. I agree with you and Timothy that I could have been more clear. I did not say in the article that I agreed with Cameron, but I did phrase it in such as way as to make people think that I did.
Chad,
Thanks for clarifying
I’m glad you clarified it. However, damage was done. Perhaps you could write another article for Christianity Today declaring that it’s time for the entire ex-gay movement to divorce itself from Cameron.
And BTW, if you want to honor the truth, you have to disagree with pretty much everything Cameron has written, not just much.
Chad Thompson at October 20, 2005 03:00 PM
…I really do disagree with much of what Cameron has written, and I state this in my book as well as in my DVD….
This strikes me as being silly. You disregard much of what Cameron has produced, but accept that with which you agree. I’m not exactly sure why, if you disagree with the conclusions of much of his work, you would not dismiss him out of hand and do your own work on the other topics. That is what any legitimate scientist would do.
I’ll eschew making my usual snide remark about psychology.
Chad, you do not have to buy into the anti-gay rhetoric of the christian right to be happy. May I suggest checking out the wonderful work of Soulforce who are showing the gay and religous communities that one can be a christian and embrace their innate characteristics of being a gay human being. I am not a christian but I have respect for the christian faith but will never accept that a homosexual must become heterosexual in order to be “normal”. Gay is normal to us and there is absolutely nothing shameful about it. Please stop aiding and abetting the movement that seeks to have us live a lie and to accept that we are unworthy or second class citizens. Please stop aiding a movement that seeks to quash our advancements in equality, that seeks to expose us to discrimination and hatred, that seeks to denounce our dignity as human beings. Reaching out to a gay person as a human being involves a little respect and dignity, something that the fundamentalist christian movement does not have in any way, shape or form. I am a happy gay atheist who is married, that’s right, married, to my husband. We pose not threat to society, are sane and well adjusted, hard working tax payers, Canadian, do not have HIV or other diseases and have been together for 13 years. Please give your fellow man some respect and stop denouncing our existence. I am very concerned about the way the United States has chosen to treat its gay citizens and my heart goes out to their struggle and I will assist in any way I can. I have donated money to many advocacy groups based in the US and will continue to do so. That includes speaking out against the travesty of fundamentalist christianity. You can do whatever you want with your life, but don’t expect that all gays must become a bigoted christian hetero to be a worthy human being,it’s not going to happen. I actually feel sad that you have fallen prey to this ugly movement and cannot find true happiness as a gay human being. Good luck however in whatever you do.
Chad,I will say this politely, but it’s bluntly put : grow up. You were caught red-handed. The adult thing to do is apologize when this is pointed out, and move on.You are not a victim here. You victimized a whole group of people when you regurgitated Paul Cameron. You were not misunderstood or taken out of context, it wasn’t anything to do with an editor, you aren’t being picked on because you tell people you are ex-gay. If you are feeling rather battered or embarrassed, please understand the real reason why and how you got yourself in that mess.We also don’t have to agree or disagree about your religious thoughts, or how you wish to live your life. Frankly, we need not even like one another; although we do not know you and have not spoken about you in that way. It took a considerable effort on your part before we eventually said:
I rarely do this, but one of the few insights given to me in Baptist Sunday School was a single occasion when a very decrepit but wise teacher said:
Personal integrity is difficult to achieve, particularly when involved in something much larger than any one individual. Heaven only knows I have said more than enough stupid, incorrect or deliberately hurtful things in my time; and I imagine I will again. Personal integrity is kept not by pretending otherwise, but recognizing and making amends afterward.That’ll be more than enough of a sermon for today from us.(And Timothy will be pleased — me quoting a Sunday School teacher and all!)
Grantdale- thanks for the link and quote. Thanks to the others for delving into the subject more.
Chad- as much as I am not one to be cynical, I agree with some of the others. To use Cameron at all without completely distancing yourself from all of his studies and actually POINTING OUT how untrue his claims are, is to play with fire. It’s too easy for anti-gay folks to see you use a claim of Cameron’s, say that some of it is true, and then go on to believe that it is true.
“We pose not threat to society, are sane and well adjusted, hard working tax payers, Canadian”
Isn’t that a contradiction in terms? 😉
KIDDING!!!
Chad,
There is a saying by The Husia:
“When you throw a lance, be sure your aim is true.”
When the tribe requires good hunters, Chad. They aren’t going to take the guy who hasn’t the skills for good hunting.
You throw plenty of lances, Chad.
But the effort is useless.
Yeah, I said it.
Are you ignoring me for a reason?
Check out these words by a very brilliant and down brotha’,
James Baldwin:
“It is a very grave matter to be forced to imitate a people for whom you know-
which is the price of your performance and survival…you do not exist.
It is hard to imitate a people whose existence appears mainly, to be made tolerable by their bottomless gratitude that they are not, thank heaven,…YOU.”
God bless you grantdale.
You and I may never see eye to eye.
Me and my big mouth…
I was looking at my posts and oh, boy…
I can really get in a fever and I’m not even gay and I question my qualifications AGAIN, to speak about being gay, gay folks and gay identity.
What do I I know?
I was waiting around for you guys to disagree with me or let me know when I’ve stepped over a line.
I was hoping to fire up Chad and get him to do something beyond a platitude or two.
I guess I don’t understand someone who isn’t stepping up to the war with the fighting spirit I would expect.
This situation with anti gay people requires sharp and true lances…
The pen could well be mightier than the lance.
I could walk away…
I absolutely have no dog in the fight. Not my dog, not my fight.
Yep, I could be like…y’all on your own.
I’ll just take my fried chicken from this picnic and boogie.
And yet…
Knowing is being,
Knowing is courage,
Knowing is love,
I may not be you, but I know you, brothers.
I was never afraid to know you and your own voices, your own faces, your own chances.
I never feared knowing you enough to touch you and have you touch me where it matters.
It’s the knowing who I am too that brings me to be with you.
I don’t have a dog…
But I can fry up some serious fried chicken and here we are at this table…
So, brothers and sisters…you HUNGRY?
Regan, I am HUNGRY! A heterosexual ally is appreciated more than you’ll ever know. Truth be told, it is people such as yourself that do more to advance equality and educate with the truth than most of we activists, seriously. I read each and every one of your posts and love what you have to say, both here and at Wayne Besen’s site. I never even knew the “ex-gay” concept existed until I stumbled on Wayne’s site a few months ago. I now know enough about it and have seen enough to know that it is now one of my pet causes, especially having a psychology and physiology science background and being steadfastly non-religious. I do consider myself fortunate and am grateful for the life that I have. I live in a free country that recognizes me as an equal citizen (Canada) and I have been fortunate not to have faced discrimination of any kind since adolescence. I am truly grateful for my position in life. But it was hard-earned. The pathetic handling of gay rights in the US caught my attention earlier this year with W’s “protect the sanctity of marriage” BS. When I dug deeper and started waving into the blogosphere, I was disgusted by what religion and big government was doing to gays. So I started to speak out on these blogs and to my friends and acquaintances and donate money to various US based gay rights causes. I will continue to oppose fundamentalist religion and attempts to shame and stigmatize gay people through blatant lies and fear tactics. I have to admit though, the use of these has been a brilliant strategy by our enemies. It certainly is working in the United States. The gay voice is almost silent behind all of the bashing. Where is this sinister gay agenda they are all spouting off about? There is nothing sinister about seeking equality, respect and dignity.
Religious conservatives like Fox’s Bill O’reilly and anti-gay psychologist Warren Throckmorton are wrongly critical of National Coming Out day. Teens acknowledging their same sex attractions is not a bad thing, being asked to hide them is. Sexual orientation is not pliable as Throckmoron states. Much of the population may be at least slightly bisexual and able to alternate which desire we act on or suppress but that is not pliability – the desires persist regardless. Throckmorton admits most of us have had a same sex attraction. The historically visible gay minority is primarily same sex attracted and not suited to suppressing desire for the male gender many societies consider sexually repugnant. One primitive tribe requires that all boys be sexually involved with older men until designated maturation. At that point the man-boys return to their inborn strongest sexual desires and most select partners of the opposite sex while only a small percentage (similar to what we consistently find in all societies across time) pursue their predominant desire for same sex intimate relationships. This shows that while society can temporarily coerce people into going against their same or opposite sex attraction, left to their own innate tendencies people will return to what comes natural to them. That includes same sex intimate relationships – a fact Throckmorton does a disservice to fairness, justice, truth, and society by ignoring.
He complains teens may prematurely label themselves gay but he also prematurely and possibly destructively label gays as ex-gay. The ex-gay industry wrongly claims that complete change is possible and gays can completely convert same sex desires into opposite sex desires. Everyone involved in conversion therapy deserves to know that many of even the most prominent ‘ex-gays’ admit they still repress same sex attractions. Many ex-gays have renounced conversion therapy due to high rates of suicide or have been discovered as frauds secretly involved in gay sex. Given the strong religious, social and financial incentives to lie, therapist opinions of and participant claims of successful and complete conversion are not sufficient to be assumed true. A penis volume measurment device must be used in conjuction with separate sexual images of men and women to test objectively if any change in the level of same sex attraction has really occurred. If teens labeleling themselves gay is bad because its premature then O’reilly and Throckmorton must condemn traditional society blindly and prematurely labelling us all hetereosexual by default at birth, particularly those who come to have primarily same sex attractions. Kids are harmed by having heterosexual identities forced on them before they realize which gender(s) they are attracted to and are mature enough to decide if they are better off accepting same sex attraction or struggling to suppress it. Teenagers only become confused about their sexuality because when a same sex attraction appears it conflicts with what they’ve been taught by traditional society. They’ve been led to believe they are totally heterosexual and same sex attractions are an undesirable that only happens to undesirable others. Admitting to themselves and others that they experience these attractions and that doesn’t make them bad people is part of the resolution of this confusion. If picking a gay sexual identity too young causes gay sexual experimentation then prematurely identifying as heterosexual causes opposite sex sexual experimentation. O’reilly and Throckmorton can’t have it both ways.
Religious conservatives like Throckmorton claim to oppose moral relativism but practice it in the form of moral subjectivism. Whether they consider an action good or bad is dependant on who does it, not the action itself: Throckmorton criticizes the National Education Association for not presenting both the ex-gay and gay affirming view, but not the ex-gay organizations which also present only one side of the story. That’s a disservice to fairness, justice, truth, and society. The ex-gay industry is primarily a political ploy to reinforce a rejecting social environment which blindly and needlessly torments with erroneous assumptions of heterosexuality and condemnation anyone with a same sex attraction. This is evidenced by its studiously avoiding objective measures of success and callous concealment of the suicide rates involved with conversion therapy. Apparently having a gay kill himself is just as much a win for religious conservatives as is a claimed conversion. What religious fundamentalists like Throckmorton oppose is not the moral relativism of unjustifiable excuses, but recognition that arbitrary religous teachings based on fabricated evidence are sometimes irrational and wrong. Faith – accepting ideas at face value when you’re too young to think logically and then as an adult rigidly adhering to them despite any evidence to the contrary – is not a virtue. If Throckmorton’s claim to not hate gays was true he would try to make things better for all people with same sex attractions including those who wish to be in monogamous, supportive and loving same sex relationships. That means supporting gays’ right to marry the one they are most attracted to. That means telling the truth: There’s a slippery slope from teaching same sex attractions shouldn’t be acknowledged or acted on to violence against people with those attractions.
Even if male teens with same sex attractions do not declare as gay, effeminity is often present and reflexively and unconciously displayed. Its difficult and stressful to suppress, readily apparent to the public and draws verbal and physical attacks from traditional society because if its wrong to act on same sex attractions those with them are undesirables to some extent. In school I watched while an effeminate classmate who never claimed to be gay was regularly verbally and physically assaulted. Most of us have seen that kind of thing. I also was attacked as I struggled unsuccessfully to entirely suppress reflexive feminine gestures and slips of the tongue betraying my same sex attraction. It may not be the same prejudice blacks experienced, but ask Jews what its like to live hiding a secret, in fear and constantly on guard.
Teens declaring themselves GLBT on National Coming Out Day are not doing it just to be a part of adult political activities. They’re not taking on a predetermined identity supposedly causing behavior consistent with a role or adult expectations. Teens are more autonomous these days and less likely to do that. They are simply acknowledging they experience a level of same sex attraction that appears without any choice, just as opposite attractions do. They are unburdening themselves from the socially imposed stress of hiding their same sex attraction and the reflexive mannerisms making it apparent. They are intentionally creating a future where they are protected from physical and psychological abuse by increasing the numbers of people who know a gay person. Studies show those who know a gay person are less hostile to gays and increasing numbers of them reduces attacks against gays (those with same sex attractions). Throckmorton’s statement that its okay for gay adults to act responsibly on same sex attractions would help stop this unfair socially destructive oppression and is glaring by its ommission from the writings of someone claiming to not hate gays.
Randi Schimnosky
randi.schimnosky@sasktel.net
SPEAK!!
Speak, brother!
(Regan stands up and applauds)