Click Image To View Full Size
Click Image To View Full Size
It appears from Love In Action’s newest advertisment they now offer treatment for sexual sins above and beyond homosexuality. However the reader is left to wonder what exactly is considered a sexual sin. I thought I should have some fun with that. Huge thanks to Peterson Toscano who wrote at least half of it and and to Wayne for being a good sport and letting us use him.
A high-resolution PDF of the graphic can be download here.
I think it would be wonderful for a legitimate religious ministry to contribute to objective clinical solutions for life’s various compulsions and other unhealthy behaviors.
Unfortunately, Love In Action lacks licensed clinical expertise and objectivity. Its mission is not to cure compulsions, but rather 1) to create fundamentalists and 2) to condemn men and women to live out Hollywood/Madison Avenue caricatures of masculinity and femininity, not to be authentic persons.
Love In Action presumes to know what sexual sin is — even as they make it their official policy to commit sins of a sexual nature against clients.
Nice, Dan 🙂 Kudos to Peterson, too.
And thanks again to Wayne Besen.
…just another household chore, like cleaning the oven.
I needed that laugh – thanks.
Mike A. said:
I think it would be wonderful for a legitimate religious ministry to contribute to objective clinical solutions for life’s various compulsions and other unhealthy behaviors.
My first thought was to agree emphatically, but certainly there are some out there already? I’m hard pressed to back that up with any references at the moment but I’m guessing that the ex-gay thing brings out more of the fringe element, e.g., LIA et al.
David
ReasonAble at January 2, 2006 12:48 AM
…just another household chore, like cleaning the oven.
Our oven cleans itself. I just have to set the dials to the appropriate setting and hit the “start” button. I don’t consider that much of a “chore.”
Regarding the post a “sexual sin” is nothing more than an “I don’t like….” It’s something like the use of “liberal” or “left” as an epithet, which are thrown around liberally (i.e., “quite often”) on web sites such as IndeGayForum.
Regarding MikeA’s
I think it would be wonderful for a legitimate religious ministry to contribute to objective clinical solutions…
Don’t hold your breath waiting for them to. They will generally filter their “solutions” through their preconceived religious notions, which are hardly objective. Besides, if they even tried to, it would probably drive away donors. It’s all about money, remember?
Mike said “Love In Action…Its mission is not to cure compulsions, but rather…2) to condemn men and women to live out Hollywood/Madison Avenue caricatures of masculinity and femininity, not to be authentic persons.”.
That is such a major failing of the whole exgay philosophy. Nature has far more continuums than rigid boundaries and black and white categories. Most people simply do not perfectly mirror those rigid gender categories and its a needless stressor on many, maybe most people to try and fit into them. Society would be far better off it encouraged everyone to put into productive goals the energy spent trying to live gender roles that don’t accomodate the varying ratios of feminine and masculine traits most of us feel naturally.
As a pre-op male to female transexual I have acutely felt the desire of society to force me into rigid opposing gender roles neither of which fit me very well. I am “transgendered” in that I have both typically masculine and typically feminine traits. The traditional male role doesn’t work for me very well and I can’t fit perfectly into the stereotypical female gender role either, I am the third sex and even the medical professionals assisting me in the transition to the most female body I can have, have criticized me for not being feminine enough. They of all people should recognize many of us are most suited to a mixture of stereotypical male and female traits.
There is medical and psychiatric intervention for drug, alcohol, food or other addictions available.
Substance dependencies also have chemical and drug programs that work well.
These are behavioral issues that do have ultimate physical and mental outcomes that are proven deadly and destructive to relationships, whether professional, familial or romantic.
LIA doesn’t want to recognize this. Nor recognize that homosexuality doesn’t resemble any of it, nor the fact that heterosexuals suffer from these same problems, yet their orientation can’t conveniently be blamed for it.
Nor the fact that lined up side by side, have the same outcomes or risks for both gay and straight.
Worse yet, they don’t acknowledge healthy and well adjusted young gay people, like Zach, for example.
This is outrageous behavior for people being paid or profiting from their programs.
This defies quality control demanded from all other programs concerning mental and physical health.
But because certain people refuse to define homosexuality by what it really is, this cannot be accepted.
And just because it’s AIMED at gay people can’t be allowed to continue without demanding an accurate and full account of efficacy and most of all, NECESSITY.
I would especially demand the necessity for becoming ex gay.
Sure, sure….the ‘god really wants it’ excuse is at the foundation of this exercise.
But while we all are dealing with mere mortals and flesh and blood men…I’d say, BRING ME GOD to speak for himself.
If he’s not showing up, and there’s just Randy Thomas and DL Foster or whoever preaching instead.
I’d say they have no case for themselves, let alone the Zachs of the world.
clever
though I wish there wasn’t a penis… I’m not a prude but I hate to play up to the expectations of those who hate us, and I hate to give them more ammunition.
Also, I’d like to think that there are people who come across this site who are seeking answers and I wouldn’t like for their first impression to be that we are all about sex and not about ideas.
Ok, the soapbox is now free for someone else to use
🙂
HAHAHAHAHAHA.
🙂