OOOPS… I didn’t see that Daniel had already posted about this before I posted. Sorry Daniel.
But here’s my take on it:
According to writer Michelle Goldberg, Alan Chambers and Randy Thomas of Exodus International were scheduled to be at President Bush’s anti-gay-families speech in favor of constitutional discrimination. I find this to be disturbing for two reasons.
First, this further illustrates that Exodus International is primarily a political organization and has very little concern with the lives of people who are gay. If their interest was in appealing to same-sex attracted people and sharing a message of hope for change, they would steer clear of political events where their target audience is villified and debased.
This further convinces me that Exodus no longer seeks to provide care to those seeking to reorient but instead has chosen the path to money and power that can be achieved by appealing to the worst fears and biases of anti-gay pastors, parents, and activists.
Second, this invitation lends legitimacy to a fringe organization. Whoever vetted Chambers and Thomas would have to know that their teachings are in direct opposition to every legitimate professional mental heath or childs health organization. They would have to be aware that Exodus has made claims that have been called by us and many others into question. Yet the White House was willing to invite these people to an event solely due to their anti-gay activism.
This sort of pandering discredits both the administration and our country.
I guess Exodus has gone from gays can change thier sexual orientation, to gays should change thier sexual orientation, to gays must change thier sexual orientation, to gays are evil and the homosexual agenda must be stopped at all costs. It is interesting to me that the mission statement doesn’t currently speak to providing “reparative therapy” resources for changing the sexual orientation or changing gender identity of their clients — I guess actual LGBT people aren’t part of their mission, but “educating and impacting the world” is.
Again, I don’t get what Exodus has to do with the politics of gay marriage.
Their site explicitly claims healing in the power of Jesus’ name (although it his name is enmeshed deeply in pseudo-psych babble). For the non-Christian, why would they have any reason to think they can or should seek change?
If it requires conversion to Christianity to change, and if it is the case that gay marriage ought to be avoided and condemned, and if the case for this condemnation is on the fact that people can change…
Well, let’s just skip this FMA bullsh**t and have an amendment proclaiming that Christianity is the official religion (and so is the language Jesus spake–the King’s English).
Seriously. I am not at all against people wanting to change their sexuality, living celibately, etc. I am just asking for a little consistency in their arguments!
fricken kapos!
anyone need anymore evidence.
Timothy Kincaid wrote,
‘Whoever vetted Chambers and Thomas would have to… be aware that Exodus has made claims that have been called by us’
What makes you think that whoever approved Chambers and Thomas had ever heard of exgay watch?
ab, you left out the rest of his sentence:
Whoever vetted Chambers and Thomas would have to know [omitted]that their teachings are in direct opposition to every legitimate professional mental heath or childs health organization. They would have to be aware[omitted] that Exodus has made claims that have been called by us [omitted]and many others into question.[omitted]
Exgaywatch’s research is obviously not Timothy’s point.
ab at June 5, 2006 07:24 PM
Here’s why I think that whoever vetted Chambers and Thomas would have had to have heard of exgaywatch:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Alan+Chambers%22+%22Randy+Thomas%22&hl=en&lr=&start=0&sa=N
ab, didn’t grantdale give you enough of a spanking last time you were here?
Ah, here we go again with an off-topic subject.
I’d better not answer Randi’s question.
There were 8550 hits for that Google search, Mr. Kincaid. I agree one has to do one’s homework, but do you really want me to read all 8550 of them? Can’t we narrow things down a little?
but do you really want me to read all 8550 of them?
Maybe you could go ahead and run them down and give us a report on what you find.
You can respond off topic ab if you wish here:
https://exgaywatch.com/blog/archives/2006/06/open_forum_anno.html
I might leave a comment there tonight regarding your last performance here.
Posted by: Timothy Kincaid at June 5, 2006 07:35 PM
Looks like XGW is the fourth Google hit.
Yep, I think they probably heard of XGW. Even if they didn’t, I don’t think (though Timothy can correct me) that XGW’s work was his primary point in those two sentences.
So why the thread hijack for something so not essential to the point?
Sadly, they don’t really understand how they’re being used. They were vetted by James Dobson, who uses them as cannon fodder for his political agenda. Whatever Dobson wants, Dobson gets.
Steve,
You’re probably right. Unfortunately, Dobson has an agenda other than upholding the credibility of the office of presidency. And unfortunately, Dobson puts his agenda above the good of the country.