Eyewitness: Love Won Out Spouts ‘Horrific’ Messages; Youth Attendants ‘Intelligent; Somewhat Liberal’
Christopher Jay Hall, a guest blogger at “Raging Pride,” attended Exodus’ Love Won Out conference in Pheonix, Arizona on February 19th and was horrified by the kind of information being given as “fact:”
- Speakers were determined to address a transgender person by “the way God intended them to be” and not how they identified personally. Transgender issues are often difficult for ex-gay activists to grasp, since gender identity and sexual orientation are two different things that don’t necessarily correlate. The classic argument is “God doesn’t make mistakes.”
- Heterosexual couples have a life-long interest in their relationships that homosexuals lack. Studies that “prove” gays (specifically, gay men) have thousands of partners in a lifetime and have an average relationship lifespan of a few weeks have been disproven again and again, but are still used in conferences like these. That aside, since gay women are stereotypically perceived to be monogamous, I suppose this statement doesn’t account for them.
- If a daughter lacks a healthy relationship with her mother, there is worry for lesbianism. A child should want to be like her mother.
- An over-simplified understanding of genetics is used as scientific “proof” of their views. Genes will “cause alcoholism, violent behavior, depression, etc.” but this is part of being in the Devil’s grip in a world born into “Original Sin.” The “gay gene” must likewise be resisted.
Long after gays are given the equal rights they are due, and long after LGBTQ equality becomes a given, no matter the biological significance of homosexuality in nature, Exodus and their ilk will still cling to the “gay gene” canard. It’s much easier than trying to argue actual science – since they know it is not on their side.
- 91% of women who identify as lesbian are apparently the way they are because of trauma from their childhood, largely sexual in nature. They also believe women are gay because of their relationships with men went sour.
Since a lesbian by definition is a woman who is exclusively attracted to other women, it wouldn’t surprise me if a relationship with a man “went sour.” But LWO here seems to say that when women get “tired of men” they’ll just flip a switch and go with women.
Additionally, Hall heard messages being delivered to queer and questioning youth in attendance that are extremely irresponsible, considering the rate of suicide among such young people:
Apparently, there [are] no such thing as homosexuals as we are all broken heterosexuals. They told the youth that homosexual behavior is always a sin. People who believe they are homosexual are not the sin itself. The person is not an abomination rather their behavior is the abomination they must seek help in overcoming.
There was, however, some hope.
[T]he youth were very intelligent and to some degree liberal. They were curious as to why our “sin” of homosexuality was a focus of the church when there are so many other sins within the church itself that are being ignored. The best question that left the presenters baffled was, “If it is bad to change one’s sex because it was god’s original intention to have us born the way we are, than why do we dye our hair, wear braces to “fix” our teeth, receive plastic surgery, etc. I was happy to see the amount of liberal individuals who attended, I am just saddened to see so many hurt souls who are forced to attend and the church feels they have no role in the high rates of suicide amongst our LGBTQ youth. What ignorance!
What ignorance, indeed. With all their talk of “grace for the homosexual” and having compassion and “true tolerance,” the messages being delivered at the conference give quite a different image.
“Transgender issues are often difficult for ex-gay activists to grasp, since gender identity and sexual orientation are two different things that don’t necessarily correlate.”
Good point. You might keep that in mind the next time you use the insulting and hegemonic term “LGBT” to describe gay people. That reactionary term does not describe gay people and it does not describe trans people. It is an amalgamation concocted by some privileged academics in the 1990s to serve a particular agenda. By linking sexual orientation with gender identity, we are aiding and abetting a lie of the homophobic right and adding to the confusion already caused by groups like Exodus.
As a straight ally who is just now discovering how and why the term “homosexual” is considered offensive, I thought that “LGBT” was a safer alternative. I’d really like to be more vocal on the topic, but am concerned that what I say may even offend the very people whose equality I mean to promote, while on the other hand, constant uncertainty about what words I should use may make me completely incomprehensible to those still on the fence about LGBT (yes, I just used that term) equality, who are the very people I’m trying to convince.
oh, i LOVE it. there’s literally somebody out there to be offended about each and every term used to describe human beings of a sexual minority group.
There are so many contradictory things in these assertions Exodus is making, where to start? Their assumptions of superiority aren’t even borne out by reality, as we well know. But an intelligent person, seriously reading between the simplistic lines would be able to discern the contradictions.
There is also a tendency to deliberately omit HALF or much less of the entire of any given study or research and to make statements completely out of context or that have no analogy or comparisons made to gay people.
“Heterosexuals have a lifelong interest in their relationships that homosexuals lack…”
This is egregious in disregarding that gay people as a minority don’t have as many options in finding a compatible partner as hets do, and usually are fighting a lifetime of social discouragement of such relationships during the more important formative years.
To assume that lesbians are straight women who haven’t met the right man, is dismissing the fact that straight women have the same problem. Narrow definitions of the role of women and men, are standards which can’t respect individuals. I resent this as a woman, let alone an independent straight woman.
Exodus seems to be a corral of very weak people, disorganized around blame, rather than personal responsibility. Issues they wouldn’t get into in the first place, if they had tough characters.
I remember that study regarding so many partners among gay men. The omission here, is what a small sampling that was. That the interviews were among people who frequented places like bathhouses or who were sex workers, I think.
This is a lot like going to AdultCon and interviewing about 200 attendees, and then reporting that heterosexuals had a lot of sex partners in a year or so.
No minority can be representative of ALL the people in the group. If hetero researchers did that, straight people would resent it.
Especially if it was used in public policy to deny civil rights.
Why do the people of Exodus or NOM or any other organization whose purpose is doing just that, say gay people are wrong or prejudiced to resent it?
And despite pathologies that present in both gay or straight people, no straight person has to forfeit being married or suffers job discrimination if those issues are in their lives.
Alcoholics can get married.
So can adulterers.
Genetic predisposition to pass it on to progeny (such as schizophrenia and addiction) isn’t a basis for marriage discrimination among heteros.
And a sex life doesn’t have to be in evidence for a gay person to be denied housing, or a job protection or anything that is a civil right in this country.
So the assertions that having a sex life or life partner is their concern is BS too.
These lies, distortions and omissions are DANGEROUS. Exceptionally dangerous as pointed out. A vulnerable teenager will be crushingly disappointed and lose money over such a thing. This does put them at risk for suicide or emotional blackmail abuse and family problems.
Religious freedom shouldn’t include being able to do these things without a serious challenge. The risk is too great. And no religious organization has a right to put people at risk.
Human sacrifice, whether direct or indirect, is illegal.
I’m not sure if you meant it as such, but your comment comes across as confrontational. It might be more effective for your if you explain in a less inflammatory way what you find objectionable about the term LGBT. You may think it is obvious, but for those of us that use the term with no other agenda than to be as inclusive as possible, it isn’t obvious at all.
It would probably be a good idea to also offer a term that you think would be a good alternative. After all, if there’s a learning curve to be had, you achieve a lot more by helping others ascend that curve.
If a daughter lacks a healthy relationship with her mother, there is worry for lesbianism. A child should want to be like her mother.
What if she lacks a relationship with her lesbian mother? Is that a good thing?
As a straight ally who is just now discovering how and why the term “homosexual” is considered offensive, I thought that “LGBT” was a safer alternative
All individuals accounted for by those letters share many political issues in common, but there are also many issues specific to trans people such as being able to get legal recognition of our correct gender. Just remember it’s a political grouping, it should not subsume all identities.
How about we call both male and female homosexuals “gay” and transgendered people, well, “transgendered?” Transgendered people need to fight their own battles and not hitch their wagons to gay organizations.
Or better yet, Mark F., we could remember that inclusion makes us stronger, especially where the issues gay folk are dealing with intersect with the issues trans folk are dealing with.