- Mike Ensley of Exodus reviews pro-gay documentary For the Bible Tells Me So
- Concerned Women for America’s Matt Barber on supposed gay threat to blood supplies
- Kern claims speech was taken “out of context”; read it in its full context here
- Family Research Council’s Peter Spriggs: I’d like to export gays
From Rep Kern’s speech:
So true – and a lot of garbage was coming out in this speech.
EXACTLY! Thanks for pointing that out Nick.
Her reflections, to me, do point to that principal. I’d had those same thoughts but hadn’t taken the time to verbalize it the way you did.
Mike took issue with the snide remarks about exodus out-patients (may I use that term? Is it accurate and appropriate?) in the animated part of For The Bible Tells Me So. Actually, I thought that was the weakest portion of the film, but I digress.
I think that the tongue-in-cheek lines about the sexual orientations of people in, and coming out of, ex-gay programs are fair game until said ex-gay programs start being explicitly honest about what “ex-gay” really means, what it ends up meaning for many people in the program, and also start being up-front about the discrepancy between realistic goals and unrealistic goals.
Not as a criticism of the individuals of course, but a criticism of an organization that continues to dishonestly use the ambiguity of the term to its advantage.
“Family Research Council’s Peter Spriggs: I’d like to export gays”
He said no such thing. This is dishonest.
“Family Research Council’s Peter Spriggs: I’d like to export gays”
He said no such thing. This is dishonest.
It looks like they chopped the part where he says that off the video in the link above. Fortunately it’s on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6JuKnXJGTc&eurl=https://www.goodasyou.org/
So yes Nunja Bidnet, I’m afraid he did say that.
Quite right, Nunja, he said he would like to “export homosexuals.”
Also, Nunja, please supply a valid email address if you wish to post again.
Nunja, these are Peter Sprigg’s exact words:
My article contained a paraphrase, hence the absence of quotation marks.
Boo, they’re in the the main video, at the top of the report.
Sprigg said it. I saw the link myself and it did not sound tongue-in-cheek. Also let me give a little more detail on how CWA pushed the lie about the “gay threat” to the blood supply.
Joe Solmonese of HRC issued a statement commenting on testimony from the American Red Cross, the American Association of Blood Banks and America’s Blood Centers. The groups testified that the ban on blood donations from men who have had sex with men since 1977 should be lifted.”
Concerned Women for America’s press release did not comment on the testimony. It centered on attacking Solmonese for commenting on this testimony.
Ok, I finally just watched that. It made all the difference in the world to hear it out loud.
…I know they think that, so I have no less respect for him for just having said it. I just can’t believe he actually said it.
Again, apparently the whole thing hinged on hearing OUT LOUD that I should be exported from the country.
On a lighter note, imagine that slave trade. “Quick, I need more dancers. I’ll pay anything!”
Christopher Eberz,
The mere fact that they used a cartoon to illustrate their point shows that the film makers were trying to make light of a very serious topic. Sometimes humor works best to convey a message, and I think they did a great job in doing that. The fact that people go into an assembly line gay and come out “straight” clearly depicts how programs like exodus projected themselves to the gay public. Those of us who sought them certainly thought so. All the literature and what-not gave every indication that if one just went through the program, in the end, one would become straight.
So the cartoon portion certainly did not falsify anything exodus and the like have claimed. While certainly an exageration, that was the whole point of the cartoon anyway: to exagerate to make a larger point.
Personally I am glad some people took offense to the conveyer belt image because that is not how a person changes in any circumstance. When dealing with human beings, you don’t run them through a program. You don’t make the person fit the program, you make the program fit the person. If they did that though, I doubt there were be a single exgay ministry open.
“Exporting” homosexuals and denying “import” of homosexuals… so people are just stuff to be rejects or to be placed into a box? That is really very shallow to me. Kind of sad too….
Between the Sally Kern debacle and this latest statement by Peter Sprigg, I get the impression that the rhetoric of the right is becoming more vitriolic. It seems to moving away from “gays can change” to “let’s get rid of them, they’re evil and a danger.” This will backfire on them as it highlights their prejudices.
Please export me to Tahiti.
I wouldn’t mind New Zealand myself…