Greg Quinlan was once a prominent ex-gay activist. He founded the Pro-Family Network in Dayton, Ohio in 1998, and appeared in I Do Exist, the ex-gay video by Warren Throckmorton, in 2004. It appears he left Ohio in the last year or so and now works with the New Jersey Family Policy Counsel in an unknown capacity.
In an interview concerning the recent coming out of contemporary Christian singer Ray Boltz, Quinlan attributed false statements to one of the nations most respected geneticists, Francis S. Collins. Speaking to the American Family Association’s (AFA) pseudo-news site One News Now, Quinlan responded to Boltz’ contention that he had been born gay:
I’m absolutely shocked. I’ve got some of his CDs and cassette tapes –- tells you how long it’s been around. When he says he’s born that way, we know now for a fact that that’s false. In fact, just last year in March, the director of the Human Genome Project, Dr. Francis Collins, said this: homosexuality is not hardwired. There is no gay gene. We mapped the human genome. We now know there is no genetic cause for homosexuality.
The original source for Quinlan’s comments appears to be this article posted to NARTH’s website last year. In it, NARTH President Dean Byrd quotes a few lines from the appendix of Dr. Collins’ book, The Language of God: A Scientist presents Evidence for Belief, in such a way as to make it appear that his findings support NARTH reparative doctrine — specifically, the contention that homosexuality is entirely based on nurture.
Knowing something of Collins’ character and achievements, we contacted him when the NARTH article posted last year to find out if Bryd had accurately quoted him on the subject — we suspected he had not. We printed Collins’ response in a subsequent post, with his written permission.
It troubles me greatly to learn that anything I have written would cause anguish for you or others who are seeking answers to the basis of homosexuality. The words quoted by NARTH all come from the Appendix to my book “The Language of God” (pp. 260-263), but have been juxtaposed in a way that suggests a somewhat different conclusion that I intended. I would urge anyone who is concerned about the meaning to refer back to the original text.
The evidence we have at present strongly supports the proposition that there are hereditary factors in male homosexuality — the observation that an identical twin of a male homosexual has approximately a 20% likelihood of also being gay points to this conclusion, since that is 10 times the population incidence. But the fact that the answer is not 100% also suggests that other factors besides DNA must be involved. That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable.
Your note indicated that your real interest is in the truth. And this is about all that we really know. No one has yet identified an actual gene that contributes to the hereditary component (the reports about a gene on the X chromosome from the 1990s have not held up), but it is likely that such genes will be found in the next few years.
Realizing that Quinlan’s recent comments directly contradicted Collins’ clear statement to XGW on the matter, blogger Jeremy Hooper of GoodAsYou.org (G-A-Y) wrote Quinlan to ask about it. Quinlan responded by defending his own statement, while claiming that the quote from Collins on XGW is fraudulent (Jeremy cc’d us so we could contribute to the exchange):
The quote [Quinlan’s reference to Collins] is completely accurate and the reference you make is a fraud. Your false reference cannot be independently verified or validated. Dr. Francis Collins made the statement and it is not out of context or inconsistent with his intent.
After a request for clarification from a rather stunned Jeremy, Quinlan continued:
My experience with XGW causes me to label them as a hate group. XGW disseminates propaganda not truth.
Every person has the right of self-determination. Unless you are an Ex-Gay then you do not have that right according to the behavior and actions from XGW. Human beings can chose [sic] to do what they want with the information they have regarding how they live their lives. If someone chooses to respond to the feelings of same sex attraction by living as a homosexual they have that right. However their is little tolerance for those like me who once lived as a homosexual and have decided not to live as a homosexual.
I have received death threats, hate mail, I have been personally assaulted by homosexuals for being an ex-gay and saying so. XGW is extremely intolerant of my lifestyle choice and my public expression to the human community at large that change is possible. I have made that determination in part because there is no genetic, biological, physiological evidence for homosexuality. Lots and lots of theories but no evidence.
The matter begins with Quinlan making specious claims about genetic research and attributing them to Collins for authority. This is similar to the way Byrd at NARTH tried to use Collins’ work to gain credibility for their theories, even though in both cases the two are at odds with each other.
Things end with Quinlan calling XGW a “hate group” that spreads propaganda and is intolerant of those who choose not to have same-sex relationships. Anyone familiar with XGW might correctly suspect that Quinlan has little first hand knowledge of us, perhaps forming those views instead through PFOX (PFOX has called XGW a hate group in the past, and Quinlan has worked with them here and there). As for that last bit, intolerance of free will and choice, apparently he hasn’t read recent comments concerning commenter Jay.
It should be noted that, while Quinlan gives lip service to the idea that people have a right to live sexually honest lives, he has devoted enormous amounts of time and effort to lobby against laws which would allow people to do just that — marriage equality, bias crime laws, and even anti-bullying statutes to name a few. Pot meet kettle, kettle meet pot.
If the truth were a priority for him (or for that matter NARTH, which continues to post the inaccurate article), Quinlan could simply email Collins with a link to our previous post and nicely ask him to verify the quote. However, since the veracity of our material in this matter has been called into question, we are posting the entire email exchange between this writer and Collins from last year. My own comments were not written with public consumption in mind, so they are a bit personal but nonetheless sincere and honest.
We await, at the very least, a public correction of the erroneous statements made to One News Now, and the edit or removal of the current article and video. Anything less will only serve to further tarnish the reputation of both Quinlan and One News Now (and by extension, the AFA).
H/T Jeremy Hooper for his follow-up and assistance.
It seems to me that there is a strong correlation between being a public “ex-gay” and abandoning all relationship with the truth. It also seems to me that, since whoever the public “ex-gays” du jour are ostensibly were out gay people at some point in their lives, and should be fully aware that groups like NARTH, AFA, (insert hate group here), etc. have contributed to much demonization and stigmatization directed toward the gay community, that they wouldn’t, if they were truly acting from a place of compassion rather than fear and loathing, so quickly and uniformly align themselves with such groups.
This has been another edition of “Things that seemingly should be true, but aren’t, I wonder why, oh, I wonder why.”
No I don’t.
Frankly I think Mr. Quinlan should spare us the spurious claim that his choice is motivated in any way by scientifically derived evidence. Science has nothing to do with this. The only role that scientifically derived evidence (albeit misrepresented evidence) plays here is to ego boost the choice Mr. Quinlan already made for completely nonscientific reasons. Mr. Quinlan should at least be honest enough to admit that his choice was a deeply personal one motivated by religious, familial and cultural pressures.
As for tolerance, I see no evidence that XGW is intolerant of those who don’t choose same-sex relationships, rather what I see is a intolerance for the misinformation that ex-gays use to support their position and the obvious political direction the ex-gay movement has taken.
Hello friends,
In having spent several months reviewing literature put forth by your organization, I have found you to be suprisingly fair on an issue that usually devolves quickly from discussion and interpretation of facts of research into partisan name-calling. This may be the most emotionally charged issue on the table in our country today. I personally undertook a study of the subject for over a year and a half (off and on) after my personal experiences with gay and lesbian people did not match the information that was being promulgated by the Christian communities I was a part of at the time. In my studies I was stunned by the misrepresentation that went on by people who were supposed to be “defending the truth.”
To make a long story short, I believe that the best exegetical arguments (arguments based on the Bible) and those of science are in line with one another. Though I’ll be branded a “liberal” by the wacko right wing of Christendom, I do believe that the weight of the evidence is on the side of those who hold the position that you do: that sexual orientation is fixed (whether there is a variation in some people’s orientation is another matter) and largely unchangeable. Along with that, Christian faith communities should accept GLBT people into their midst, owing their orientation not to defect, but to a beautiful variation in God’s creative order.
Thank you again for your fine and objective investigations and I look forward to many more in the days ahead.
Blessings,
Andrew Charles Thomas
Has anyone thought to email Collins and suggest that he contact Quinlan and the others and demand a retraction?
As far as the first goes…. SEE! Heterosexuality is a choice! At least it is for a gay man such as Quinlan. As to the last, Quinlan is going to do nothing but spout the rabid anti-gay party line. He’d have to be blind not to have read that there exists certain evidentiary genetic, biological or physiological facts in support of homosexuality.
As to a gay gene, Quinlan is likely correct, there is none. That doesn’t presuppose that there may not be a genetic cause, perhaps one associated with gene expression from an incompletely methylated (shut-down) X-chromosome.
Mr. Thomas, thank you for that very nice anecdote. It’s wonderful to see someone who has done their own research who is from “the other side” (I say this with tongue in cheek.) We of course deny the false dichotomy of LGBTQ vs. Christian, or even LGBTQ vs. “Religious.” If nothing else, the goal of many gay activists (however you define that term) is to merely exist visibly – so that people who have never met a gay person before can meet one and see just how amazingly uninteresting and un-harmful our “lifestyles” are.
You HAVE come to a conclusion that many would call not just “liberal” but even “very liberal.” You say that Christian communities should not simply tolerate us as “sinners” (because we’re all sinners, blah blah blah…) but celebrate us as human beings who are simply part of G-d’s wonderful variety of creation. That’s a beautiful thought but I personally don’t hold my breath. I think when the day comes that churches start speaking openly against the horrendous fates of the Lawrence King’s and Matthew Shepard’s of the world – against targeting, bullying, and murdering of LGBTQ persons, rather than drably glossing over the facts and saying that “murder is always wrong no matter what” – THAT will be the day change is coming.
Until parts of the Christian community continue to ignore the fact that we are targeted for who we are, they are tacitly blaming us for our own victimization.
Emily, thank you for your response. I would most certainly not be holding my breath either. The kook right wing will not be one of the institutions leading the change. The good news is that the X and Y generations are far more tolerant and, in many cases, accepting of homosexuals. Also, from a more global perspective that includes American and nonAmerican varieties within Christendom, I would not find it surprising at all if there is not at least an even split on the issue among everyday, average churchgoers, which portends positively for gays and lesbians in the church in the years ahead. Full acceptance (such as what happened in the decades following the Civil War for blacks) probably will not happen in our generation. However, the rise of neo-evangelicalism (see my blog in the next couple days) gives some hope that the younger generations – the ones who actually have gay friends and accept gay family members – will moderate the extreme right to some extent. Just know that you will have an advocate in the Christian community in me, one who will tirelessly press Christians to actually live in concert with the teachings of our Savior – Love one another as you would want to be loved.
I sent him a link to this post, and a brief explanation of how NARTH’s erroneous article had caused some Cameronesque “truth by repetition.” There was some delay in recieving a reply as Collins has elected to step down as the Director of NHGRI and is no longer leading the Institute. My email to him had to be redirected through a third party at NHGRI. We did just receive a brief reply and will either add it to this post or to a brief new post.
I’m grateful that he takes the time to respond, but his reputation as someone who follows the science where it leads seems to help there. My experience with many such researchers is that they are so extremely focused on their work that it’s hard for them to appreciate the social implications (the human equation) that might result from misunderstanding or, as appears to be the case here, biased distortion of their work.
I appreciate Dr. Collins faithfulness to the truth and willingness to help.
Fortunately, Mr. Thomas, I happen to be a member of Generation Y. 😀 Sometimes I feel very privileged. And I would agree about your statements regarding Gen. X and Y. In my case, my high school graduating class’s first Gay Straight Alliance was established nearly 10 years ago! I DO see change coming.
Should someone tell Mr. Quinlan about the articles I wrote for XGW? I actually found XGW to be surprisingly welcoming to my choices. The only difference is that I call them my choices and am honest about what changes I have (and haven’t) seen in my desires since choosing to pursue celibacy.
One’s “right to self determination” is not a license to practice therapies that unethical and ineffective.
V, you might want to read the blog a bit and get back to us 😉
I actually agree with Quinlan over the “right to self-determination” thingy. You only get to determine if you are an Ex-Gay. Only they have the “Information… regarding how they live their lives….”, whereas truthful information is silenced.
Ex-Gays not only can determine for themselves or all they want for people, while the rest of us are determined by Ex-Gays who “educate” the general public that homosexuality does not exist bla bla bla, and even went as far as determining whether gays and lesbians should get married.
Such is the right of not only self-determination for Ex-Gays, but even the right to determine for all LGBTs.
My comment to V was somewhat tongue-in-cheek because around here, he was stating the obvious. Recognizing one’s right to self-determination is largely what drives us to expose the many lies and coercions that exist among ex-gay organizations and which serve to limit just such a right. The claim that we are only tolerant if one wants to live a sexually honest life is a Red Herring.