Earlier this week XGW’s Timothy Kincaid wrote about fallen ex-gay Michael Johnston’s appearance in the video “It’s Not Gay” which is still being sold by several anti-gay organizations. This morning gay activist Wayne Besen filed a complaint against one such organization, Americans For Truth, for selling what Besen calls “a fraudulent video” with the Illinois Attorney General.
C
Bad move. Was an actual attorney consulted before sending out this letter? This action raises very troubling First Amendment and Freedom of Speech issues, plus the religious goofballs can now claim that we are having the government persecute them.
Do we really want the government monitoring videos and deciding whether or not they are true?
I just spoke to Wayne and he said he penned the letter himself but did consult with a lawyer. Considering that AFT responded to a 16 year old’s Myspace blog post I’m sure we’ll be hearing from Pete on this.
I don’t know if this was a good move or a bad move from a tactical point of view. However, pursuing those who use false and misleading products to bilk people out of money is something that state Attorney Generals have been going after for a while.
It would be interesting to know how much the average person, who pursues ex-gay therapy spends on the therapy. Particularly for live in programs, I would guess that it’s a large amount of money.
Products and therapies that have not been demonstrated to be safe or effective for hair loss treatment or weight loss have been targeted for fraud by the government. Most of the people and companies involved have been for-profit enterprises.
There is no convincing evidence that ex-gay therapy works, and peddling this particular DVD is essentially a fraud, unless you were to use the DVD as a sort of historical document of the ex-gay movement. So the fraud part of this is pretty clear-cut.
The real question is whether a state Attorney General really wants to pursue this sort of action against a nonprofit entity. The whole ex-gay movement is not about facts or science. It is essentially a political movement that uses religion to try and shield itself from scrutiny. I would guess that the average state Attorney General would have rather have this fight conducted in the political arena rather than a courtroom.
I think Wayne knows that this effort has a snowball’s chance in heck of succeeding. Generally, “I changed my life through religion” has some pretty strong protections here in the US.
I’ve not spoken to Wayne about it but I suspect the effort is more related to public relations and is part of his strategy of drawing attention to the failure of the video’s primary witness.
I probably would not have gone this direction as I think it will probably simply result in, “See, the homosexuals want to censor our Christian message. That’s why we have to fight against hate crimes legislation.” – though of course the issues are separate. I hope the anti-gays will not lie about this effort and use it to our detriment, but I don’t have much faith in their integrity.
Oh I hope this goes the distance. I’m sure quite a lot of people would love to get Peter LaBarbera and some of his ex-gay friends under oath.
I know I would.
oh you silly, silly people… If any of you would actually take the time to got to AFT’s website, you would quickly see that LaBarbera is not now, nor has he ever sold anything (including the video. He simply provides an informational link.
…furthermore, you might be interested to know that Mike Johnston, after his relapse, left the “gay” lifestyle again, and is now a very happy Ex-gay with heterosexual attraction
Anon,
you made an error in your assumptions:
Johnston was not (during his relapse) living a “gay lifestyle”. He wasn’t openly living as gay.
No, he was living an “ex-gay lifestyle”: going by a false name, hiding his amoral dangerous and dispicable behavior which was endangering others – all while continuing to live as ex-gay.
His current acting out of his ex-gay lifestyle may not include sex parties (or it may, I don’t know). But I doubt that he has any more “heterosexual attraction” now than he had during the first 14 years of his ex-gay lifestyle.
Just like the last time, and the time before that…….
I think this was a bad idea. To start with, AFT isn’t selling the video and appears not to get anything from it. Do we sue the TV stations when they advertise a product that is dangerous? No, we sue the makers of the product.
Second, this complaint should have been made against the AFA, not the AFTAH. Now AFTAH has this fire power about how we are out to get him and silence him.
It would have been better to ask Peter to remove the plug for the video citing the evidence that it is a fraud and then sending this letter againt the AFA who is making money on the video and continues to try and sell a cure for homosexuality that doesn’t exist.
Peter may have removed the post plugging the video to avoid being part of the controversy and legal mumbo jumbo. Now Peter and the AFA will have articles saying we will lie about them to silence them, when in reality, I think Wayne just didn’t realize that AFT gets nothing from this but publicity.
I would add that I think it is a much bigger deal that Peter signed himself up with the IRS as a suportive gay rights organization when he is anything but that. That is the complaint that should be made.
How about someone selling a video that promotes healing through prayer? Should the state attorney general go after that? There is no compelling evidence that prayer is effective over and above a placebo effect.
There is very compelling evidence that prayer, meditiation, and even faith have cured people of disease. First they have to have a disease. Homosexuality is not a disease or disorder. So claiming you can cure it when so many people are depressed and unhappy being gay in an unaccepting world is evil and dishonest. To try and make a profit off that is even worse.
There has been amazing reseach done on prayer and Buddhist monks in Tibet that showed prayer and meditation can do amazing things that go beyond the scope of our understanding, including cures. Again, there has to be something to cure, and homosexuality doesn’t need a cure. Fear needs a cure.
When the religous right tells you they don’t fear gays, know they are not telling the truth. WHen ex-gays say they are not afraid of gays or being gay, know they are not telling the truth. They are terrified beyond your wildest imagination.
All violence comes from fear. Hate speech, wars, bullying, all of it is fear. When they say they are not afraid of us, it is because they are afraid of us and sometimes our wish to combat their lies just reinforces their fears, so they just fear us more. Not very productive if we are to end this cultural war.
As it was said, the only thing we have to fear is……
Actually Joe, there is a lot (and I mean lot) of evidence to the opposite on meditation and prayer. We hear in the media about the prayer support studies, but there are so much criticism and studies to suggest the opposite. I was actually reading articles in Sceptic and Reason magazines that looked at the studies and found them very problematic and logically faulty.
As far as Anon, I get the sense he/she is being ironic. As far as Besen’s actions, I don’t think it is a good idea. Many Christian groups believe that persecution proves truth.
All violence comes from fear. Hate speech, wars, bullying, all of it is fear. When they say they are not afraid of us, it is because they are afraid of us and sometimes our wish to combat their lies just reinforces their fears, so they just fear us more. Not very productive if we are to end this cultural war.
That’s a philosophical ideal with which I don’t necessarily agree. Many people believe evil is to be hated, resisted, or if necessary, destroyed – not out of fear but because that is how one deals with evil. What is considered to be true evil is another matter, and misidentifying it intentionally or otherwise will lead to unjust violence, yes. But distilling the entirety of negative actions and feelings down to one emotion is tragic oversimplification in my estimation, and it will lead to faulty assumptions. We like to simplify because it gives us control, a key.
As for proving or disproving the power of prayer, that’s out of our purview, and frankly irrelevant.
Well, I think in the context of the story, the power of prayer is relevant as a direct example of the difference between personal beliefs and public claims.
Mark’s example of a video touting the benefits of prayer is a very good comparison, because prayer is both contextual and personal. First, one needs to define what one means by “prayer” (i.e., xian prayer, Buddhist chants, positive thinking, pagan spellwork, etc.). Then, after establishing what one means by “prayer” and then making claims of its power, one then has to claim sole ownership over how that prayer is administered or practiced. Otherwise, any such video has no real purpose, since those who believe in prayer already do it, and those who don’t see no need to do it.
But even more, because the belief in the power of prayer is such a personal thing, anyone can really make any claim they want, either for or against, since the anecdotal evidence will always support the claim. That’s why anecdotal evidence is useless–it can only exist as support for whatever has already been assumed to be true. That’s why it is reasonable to accept the statement “I believe that prayer helps to cure sickness and ease the suffering of the sick” but not so reasonable to accept the statement, “Prayer will cure you of cancer!” The former is a statement of personal belief (which is what religion is supposed to be) and the second is a public claim. Such public claims become even more unreasonable when it is revealed that the person being touted as having been cured by prayer has died from what they were supposedly healed from (and that happens a lot with supposed faith healers of any religious stripe).
A video about the power of ex-gay ministries has the same patterns. Firstly, there is the ex-gay practice of re-defining and un-defining what “gay” and “homosexual” means so that whatever claim they wish to make is valid. Then there is the claim of ownership over the “cure”–since any criticism of their methods is met with resistence if not outright villification. Finally, there is the anecdotal nature of ex-gay claims, which relies on ex-gay folks making claims about their lives that may or may not be true (and considering the case of Johnston, much reason to think them untrue).
The problem comes not so much from the statements that ex-gays believe that they can be changed by reparative therapy but rather the public claims that reparative therapy will turn gay people straight–and even more so, using knowingly false information to support the claim. That’s what has occurred in the case of Johnston, and to a number of other public ex-gays. Whereas most folks are willing and able to look skeptically at faith-healing (including that of the power of prayer), most people are not so well-versed in ex-gay issues that they can apply the same kind of skepticism to videos like “It’s Not Gay”.
As expected, Americans for Truth has responded by taking this action and using it againt gays. It appears Peter La Barbera has just used all of this as fire power against us to show how “cruel” we are. It is not just another piece of hate speech about how we are diseased, destructive, etc…
He attacks Wayne, Pam Spaulding and all gay people as being against God, and equates homosexuality with a list of thing that are real diseases (which Peter refers to as choices like addictions and Bulemia)
I know people think I am wrong, but the only thing that can stop the hate speech of the right wing is nonviolence. I truly believe that. With nonviolence as a guiding principle our words and actions could never be thrown back at us as part of some disease. Now people just have more reasons to hate us.
Reading stories like this are very discourging on all sides in my eyes. No one wins.
Thanks to a tip from gayasyou, I just noticed that the Anonymous who posted above calling us silly, silly people was from none other than…
Concerned Women for America
Joe,
Why do you consider the use of our judicial system to be violence? Wayne’s action is a non-violent response.
I’m skeptical of the entire non-violence movement. It gets a free ride as the result of M.L. King and Ghandi, but there are legitimate questions as to its morality and effectiveness. But that’s not the discussion of this thread.
If the goal of your non-violence is to make people LIKE you, then you are very mistaken about the nature and morality of our enemies.
I believe there is a huge difference between the nonviolent truthful resistance and confrontation of Gandhi and MLK, and the surrender-and-be-slandered nonviolence that Joe seems to be recommending at the moment.
Timothy,
It’s: GOODasyou.org
Silly.
(Just call me silly cowboy: proofreader/copyeditor in training.)
thanks cowboy
how silly silly of me
🙁
I actually what I suggest as nonviolence is give them nothing to slander us about.
I love the idea os suing AFT, but Wayne should have picked a better thing to sue for and he didn’t. DO I want people to people like me? NO, I don’t even know what that comment meant, but I can assume it wasn’t said with good intentions either. All I can say is that I have no enemies. I refuse to see people as an enemy. Just because I do not see eye to eye with anyone, doen’t make them an enemy.
I am suggesting we always make sure our actions are well planned, based in complete truths, and well researched. This one wasn’t and I feel it hurt more than it helped.
I wrote my above comment and then thought more about it on my drive home from work. I decided I could sum up all my thoughts about nonviolence and gay rights as simply saying, if our actions just give anti-gay people more reasons to hate us, then we haven’t really done them or ourselves any real favors. They just hate us more and we become victimized by that hate. How does this help us?
Nonviolence is not passive in anyway, it is active and takes courage. If people want to slander us, let them and return their slanders with nothing but the truth that counters the lies. Do it without attacking them or giving them more reason to hate.
A few months ago their was a marriage rally for an amendment. A counter protests chanted “bigots” to the Christian group. I can only imagine the Christian group left more energized about fighting gays when they saw how mean we were being. IF we had approached the same rally witha nonviolence tactic and educational packets of information for the Christians, offered them coffee, engaged in conversation they may have left with a more positive feeling about gays, but they didn’t. They left thinking we are angry, mean, cruel and name calling bigots.
If wayne had chosen to call AFT out on their “non-profit” status and challenged something that is obviously wrong and undisputable, AFT would be looking bad right now and not us. The object of nonviolence is to bring people to their sense, not to their knees.
I realize I offering a solution that people don’t give a rat’s *** about but I believe in it. I only ask that you explore it.
Does it all seem like dirty politics? I might agree, Mr. Brummer, sometimes in the end it is counter productive.
I can see similarities with the swift-boat-veterans versus Kerry kind of PR debacle occurring again. There is implied or real impugnation and then defending something that should need no defending…except the facts are kept from the public. This seems to be right out of the Karl Rove-ian playbook.
Yes, Kerry lost the battle but eventually truth triumphs.
I can only think Wayne Besen is hoping any publicity is good publicity because it will certainly uncover relevant facts no matter what happens in court. We can see the relevant facts are not enough to sway the virulent promoters of the video but I can’t help thinking what Mr. Besen is doing might sway the general public’s opinion that CWA (et al) are not being very truthful and that may be the whole point of his demonstrative legal action.
What no one has mentioned when Anonymous said: “[Michael Johnston is] now a very happy Ex-gay with heterosexual attraction…”
Where’s the proof?
“A few months ago their was a marriage rally for an amendment. A counter protests chanted “bigots” to the Christian group. I can only imagine the Christian group left more energized about fighting gays when they saw how mean we were being. IF we had approached the same rally witha nonviolence tactic and educational packets of information for the Christians, offered them coffee, engaged in conversation they may have left with a more positive feeling about gays, but they didn’t. They left thinking we are angry, mean, cruel and name calling bigots.”
Most of them likely already think that anyway. If you go up to them and hand them literature, and be friendly to them, they are just going to think you’re trying to brainwash them.
All kinds of religious organizations end up having protests that involve ugly rhetoric and at times violence. Just look at the recent demonstrations and rallies in Massachusetts, one of which involved an anti-gay leader shoving a gay marriage supporter to the ground. That doesn’t seem to have stopped the anti-gay forces in that state from having success, even though I don’t recommend the behavior.
https://www.baywindows.com
I would also point out that the behavior you described really isn’t the same as Wayne Besen filing a complaint against this “Truth” group. Labarbara’s organization caters to hardcore anti-gay types. They have already hated us for many years, and this isn’t going to make any difference one way or the other.
if our actions just give anti-gay people more reasons to hate us, then we haven’t really done them or ourselves any real favors.
This is an amazing statement about which I would ask you to think long and hard. If you are saying that when we lie or distort it doesn’t help our cause, ok, but you seem close to saying that we are somewhat at fault for their hate as a result of our excercising our rights as equal citizens. Are you saying that Rosa Parks should have moved to the back of the bus so those white people wouldn’t hate her so much?
I’ve read your writings here and on your blog for awhile. I admire much of what you say, but unfortunately there is often the suggestion that you hold some kind of moral high ground because you expouse “non-violence.” No one here, or anywhere that I’ve heard has espoused violence against even the most extreme haters. You can disagree with what Wayne is doing, but to do so by saying he’s doing violence is offensive.
1) TWO did not file a lawsuit. That is not accurate. We filed a complaint. Anyone can do it if they visit the AG’s office online.
2) Under Joe’s Brummer’s logic, HRC and Congress should not try to pass hate crime legislation this month because it will give Exodus, AFA, and Focus on the Family reason to claim we are stopping their right to free speech.
3) Under Joe’s logic, gay people should no longer have sex because we have given Peter the right to say, “Where is right and wrong, and homosexual practice will always be wrong. Leaving it will always be right.”
4) Joe suggests I should ask Peter to stop selling the tape. This is naive and foolish because Peter knows exactly what he is doing. And, for the record, I did confront him about this tape long ago, as well as Bob Knight. Um, they are still selling it, if you have not noticed. So, much for this tactic.
5) I think recklessly throwing around the term “spiritual violence” is an ugly habit that should stop, as it is a form of spiritual violence – not to mention a little bit pompous and little preachy. Strictly speaking, what I am trying to do is get a fraudulent product off the shelf so vulnerable GLBT kids won’t see it. (Or at least use the media to pressure these groups to do the right thing) By opposing TWO’s actions, Joe, you are suggesting that kids should see a fake tape based on a lie. (Or that we wait around passively until Porno Pete or Don Wildmon grows a conscience) Some of these kids may harm themselves or alter their lives based on the miracle cure presented by Johnston. Shoudn’t these kids (and adults) have the right to know the cure did not endure? I think so, and I am amazed that you don’t agree. Under your “non-violent” way, the phony tape is still for sale and on the market. The losers here are the victims making the purchases.
6) Joe said that this offers the chance for LaBarbera to claim we are stopping his free speech. To the contrary, we are not calling for less speech, we are calling for MORE speech. Truth Wins Out is not saying they do not have a right to showcase Johnston. However, they have an obligation to tell the WHOLE story – not the parts that suit their agenda. (When it comes to products, there is a right to free speech, not false speech – but that is another story)
7) Whether Johnston is now “healed” is not the question. What matters is that people decide for themselves by having access to the full range of information. Why exactly are people opposing my call to let Christians who pay hard earned money have the full story? I don’t get it.
8) I think we should stop this hair-splitting silliness and come together to demand they stop selling this tape of a barebacking sex fiend that Pure Life Ministries is advertising as available to speak to children. If we can’t agree that this is wrong, we are in really sad shape.
Sadly, you have put words in my mouth I never said, you created scenarios I never suggested. Sadly, you misunderstand nonviolence and what it means.
“Nonviolence” is not exactly what one would think it is at first glance (as I have been learning of late). It is a very carefully worked out method of living for truth, which Gandhi developed from his studies of Hindu literature and a life of careful experimentation. “Nonviolence” as Joe has already said does not mean passivity, or being a “sad sack” and accepting every abuse as if we deserve it. Votaries of the path of nonviolence can never be cowards or passive! Nonviolence is always an active force, and those who choose nonviolence as a path to self and world transformation choose it to the death…to be quite blunt…their own death rather than that of any other.
Rosa Parks (for example) had undergone training in nonviolent techniques. She utilized one of the primary methods of Satyagraha or “truth holding” protest…noncompliance with an unjust law. She was unyielding, yet willing to face the consequences of her action under the laws as they stood.
Another primary tenet of nonviolence is non-retaliation. Gandhi himself refused to file charges when he was beaten. Thus, a follower of nonviolence would be unlikely to file charges against personal wrongs done to her or him…at least, simply as a means of gaining vengeance or justice. As Gandhi said, “My experience has shown that we win justice quickest by rendering justice to the other party.” I know it seems backwards, but right words often say the opposite of what we expect. The end of nonviolence is always to gain reconciliation with those who deal out injustice and untruth. The end is to bring them to our side as friends, not to force them into submission. The dignity of the human spirit will never admit to slavery of any sort—nor even can we enslave those who oppose us to our will, for that would merely be doing to them what they did to us. They must freely choose to accept us and treat us as family or there will not be peace…there will only be masters and slaves.
There is a very important aspect of nonviolence that is generally overlooked: purification. There is very little use in attempting a nonviolent action to induce a change in our challengers if we ourselves are riddled with untruth and himsa (violence) in our thoughts, words, and actions towards those we wish to change. Christians understand this through the theology of Christ, who being innocent gave his life for sinners. One man…one innocent man…transforms the world by his suffering. Very little is likely to be achieved by attempting nonviolent action without appropriate preparation. We MUST be above reproach for such holy suffering to have any meaning. We must make no target for their accusations of hatred against Christians. We can’t call them names, and expect them to give up calling us names. We can’t serve them legal challenges and expect them to give up their legal actions against us. We can’t offer them abuse or retaliation and expect them to stop their abuse of us.
It is the simplest of algebras, my friends. I’ve long since forgotten all the hard math, but I remember from high school that both sides of an equation must equal each other: 1 + 1 = 2. Both sides of the equation must be interchangeable. Therefore, as Gandhi taught, the means must equal the end. We cannot expect violence to yield anything but violence. We cannot expect heaps of verbal abuse upon our foes to yield anything but big piles of semantic feces from them. Rather, put peace, love, and truth into the equation if you want to calculate a sum more favorable to all.
So what can we do if we choose a path of nonviolence? How can we effect the change we wish to see in the world? Well, as I mentioned above, the primary method of nonviolent action is noncompliance with injustice. Do we want the right to hold hands, kiss or otherwise express our love publicly as straight couples do? Then we do not comply with the unjust social rules that restrain us. We kiss publicly! We hold hands publicly! Do we want them to display a love for their gay brothers and sisters (something they do not have)? Then love them—hard as that may be! Do we want the right to marry? Then marry, by heaven! Do not comply in any way with the injustices that they press upon us. If they throw us in jail…if they put us on trial…if they beat us and, yes, if they kill us! Then we have lived holding to a truth that will transform the world in the end. The whole universe is bending its loving will against the forces of injustice and oppression. Be a part of that living equation that proves the sum of our diversities is always equal to our unity.
Or not…
Make angry words multiply. Divide cultures with cutting scorn. Just know what you are doing when you use these methods, and understand how the math of your choices will tally in the end.
Sadly, you have put words in my mouth I never said, you created scenarios I never suggested. Sadly, you misunderstand nonviolence and what it means.
Joe, let’s cool it with the nonviolence evangelism because that’s really what it has become. If you want to suggest a course of action, by all means do so but without constantly touting, “nonviolence, nonviolence, nonviolence”, etc. I have to be honest, I’m really tired of hearing it and I sense that others are as well. The truth is, this has become a religion for you and you can imagine how people would respond to someone commenting over and over about how we must accept this or that religious path or doctrine.
I’m done with explaining why I don’t agree with what you preach as a nonviolent approach, but suffice to say that I think you classify way too much as “violent” and your tone toward others is quite condescending. Please feel free to address the topic of the thread, but do so without the sermons, ok?
No, Joe, I have not put words in your mouth. But you have assigned motives and blame to my work that do not exist. You suggest that by countering a fraudulent tape on the marketplace Truth Wins Out is somehow exacerbating tensions with the right wing. I suppose it is true in the same way a TV show that exposes a con artist selling swamp land to senior citizens in Florida will anger the sleazy culprits.
Please show me how filing this complaint on Thursday has changed the right’s hateful rhetoric from Wednesday. They lied about us yesterday, today and they will tomorrow, no matter how hard you try to suck up to them. And, what is your brilliant strategy for getting It’s Not Gay off the market? I’m all ears.
Please show me how your approach has caused one – yes one – right wing leader to change his or her approach.
Why don’t you go to Illinois and give roses (or a sling and fresh poppers) to Porno Pete and ask him to, pretty please, take It’s Not Gay off the market. Let’s see how far you get. After all, they hate us because we don’t love them enough, right? If we just buy Pete a stack of porno mags and tell him he looks sexy, maybe he’ll come around and see how misquided he was. Perhaps, you can give him a lesson on Scripture so he can see how he is misinterpreting the Bible. Go for it – who is stopping you? If he changes his mind, becomes pro-gay and applies for a job with HRC next week, you’ll have gotten my attention.
My point is, show me the money. For all your talk about your wonderful approach, you have yet to send any leader of note to Monster.com or put real heat on the right. When you change Falwell’s or Robertson’s minds or you get Stephen Bennett to come back out of the closet I’ll finally be impressed. Until then, it is just rhetoric that cuts these people slack, even as they poison the minds of Americans with their expensive and sophistocated PR campaigns. This is not helpful.
Don’t get me wrong. Joe, your research is great and you do a fantastic service. Everyone admires you for that. I even said as much in my end of year column. But what you do with the research also matters. And being nice and getting Alan Chambers to like you is not going to get you anywhere. Attacking people, in the name of non-violence, who are trying to hold the right accountable is not a strategy and does not help your cause.
Finally, by focusing on style, you are missing the substance. I have interviewed people who may have intentionally been infected with HIV by Mr. Johnston. The AFA and AFTH are still selling this video starring a guy who attempted murder. This man is used by Pure Life, according to their site, to speak to children. And, all you can focus your energy on, is if filing a complaint may make Porno Pete angry. Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees.
I consider you a great asset to the movement, but these attacks on people in the name of non-violence have gone too far.
Have a great weekend and try non-violently writing the Attorney Generals in Mississippi and Illinois and asking them to take this abominable tape out of the marketplace before more kids die. If you want to see spiritual violence – the real deal – watch It’s Not Gay. Maybe then, you will get some perspective on what spiritual violence truly is and you will work harder to eliminate it.
Thanks
It doesn’t really rake a rocket scientist to see that AFT is the one selling the video. So all of this is moot. The TWO press release attacks Peter La Barbera for selling the tape and he is not selling it, the AFA is selling it.
If we really want the tape to stop being sold, then we need to bring much more mass media attention to it and the aggressions to need to be directed at the people who made the tape and are selling the tape.
The fact is that you accused Americans for Truth of profiting on something they are not making money on and you sent that to the AG who is also going to see that and ignore your complaint. If you had done this with the AFA, this would have been different.
The fact is simple Wayne, regardless of how good your intentions may have been, you lied in your press release about AFT. You should have been going after the AFA and the makers of the tape. You didn’t.
The AG will most likely ignore your complaints because you didn’t base the complaint to the right group or organization. She will have no case. She would have had a case with the AFA.
Ok, stop. This is not a place for personal attacks, such as calling someone a liar (or say “you lied” which is the same thing). Hash that out in personal email. While I understand the energy behind this, some of the attitude and language just isn’t appropriate here. Discussion over the complaint that was filed, how effective it might or might not be and why, these are all valid. Let’s just keep it civil and productive.
Any additional posts along these personal lines will be moderated. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
You know, Ex-Gay watch was one of the very first “gay-related” websites that I began reading…a little over a year ago now. I must say that I am consistently disappointed by the attitude and discussion here. I never want to hang around.
As GLTB folk, we feel like we have some truth to share with the fundamentalist religious community, and we expect them to listen to us. Yet right here, on this very webpage, Mr. Brummer is pointing out a single very specific truth about Wayne Besen’s action against AFT, and everyone is turning their eyes away. Just like the people who oppose us so much in Exodus and Focus on the Family, etc., you have refused to acknowlede the simple truth: in this case, Mr. Besen made a mistake implying that AFT sold the video.
It’s a simple thing. If everyone acknowledged it, including Mr. Besen, it would be no big deal. Correct the mistake move on. Instead, are you not doing the same thing that all of these religious groups do in ignoring the truth?
Further…just a couple days ago, in the comments of this site, a lady was chastised for “name-calling” when she used the term “religious reich.” Yet above, Mr. Besen has written a filthy diatrabe against Mr. Brummer and Mr. LaBarbera, and not a word from the Ex-Gay Watch hosts? Oh wait…you did stop to stifle Mr. Brummer’s statement pointing out once more Mr. Besen’s factual error; which the more it is ignored, the more it seems like an intentional untruth.
I wish you folk to be better than the Christians you oppose. I understand you have been deeply hurt by these organizations, but you can be different. You can allow dissent and argument. You can allow for course changes and correction to tactics. Your cause will not suffer for such healthy ministrations from a good soul like Joe.
Having met some of Michael Johnston’s victims terrified about their possible HIV exposure by Johnston while he was sleeping around the Norfolk area under the name “Sean,” I think any steps that can be taken to draw media attention to the hypocrisy of Johnston and his benefactors is worth while.
Also, having debated Peter La Barbera and documented the untruthfulness of his reparative therapy “research,” La Barbera knows full well that he’s selling snake oil and ought to be exposed.
you have refused to acknowledge the simple truth: in this case, Mr. Besen made a mistake implying that AFT sold the video.
To whom are you addressing this, XGW staff, Wayne Besen, other commenters? For our part, I would have to disagree; the debate here has been all over the place and we have no intention of stifling it. However, the rapidly advancing personal comments between Wayne and Joe are not appropriate here. If you believe the complaint made to the AG was a bad move, a mistake, or even an “intentional untruth” (which is just a passive way of accusing Wayne of fraud), then you may make your case. But if you are going to make accusations like the last one, make sure you have something to back it up.
Yet above, Mr. Besen has written a filthy diatrabe against Mr. Brummer and Mr. LaBarbera, and not a word from the Ex-Gay Watch hosts?
Most of what Wayne said above was not “filthy,” but it was too personal and emotional to post here. Now yes, the comments about “slings and poppers” are unacceptable and, though I didn’t itemize, I think I made clear in my post above that the language used was not appropriate. Quite honestly, I had to ask someone what the “slings” reference meant.
I wish you folk to be better than the Christians you oppose.
We don’t oppose Christians, or I wouldn’t be here. We oppose the actions of anyone who attempts to limit our rights and privileges as free citizens, whether by lobbying lawmakers as Exodus and Focus have done, or by marginalizing us through hate and fear as Peter LaBarbera and many others have done.
but you can be different. You can allow dissent and argument. You can allow for course changes and correction to tactics.
With all due respect, you could not possibly have been reading XGW for a year and still make that statement. We are equally chastised by both sides for our stands, so please don’t even attempt to make that case.
I suspect most of your comments here have been shaped by your feelings for Joe Brummer (“good soul like Joe”). Joe knows very well we appreciate him, his constant research and work. I talk with him and he knows my stand on his non-violent approach. My earlier comment directed at Joe was necessary, not because he thought Wayne was wrong, but because he is evangelizing for what has become a religious approach for him. We don’t allow that for any philosophy or ideology. His substantive comments are welcome, but not the constant drum beating about a single method being the only method.
Thank you David for allowing me the opportunity to address this issue further. You asked me to back up my claim (which I actually felt was a request for everyone to look more closely at Mr. Brummer’s assertion, but perhaps I mis-articulated my position).
Here is the web address for the article on Americans for Truth where It’s Not Gay is featured:
americansfortruth.com/news/its-not-gay-an-afa-resource-for-your-family-and-church.html
By examining the link that AFT provides, you will see that AFT is not selling this video. The link directs the reader to the AFA webstore. On the surface it would appear that AFT is not, therefore, recieving any funds from the sale of this awful video.
Here also I provide a web address that will likely be useful for long. It links to the AFT feed where, Mr. Labarbera is discussing Mr. Besen’s complaint and refuting the statements that AFT is selling the video.
americansfortruth.com/feed
Now…as I understand it, Mr. Besen filed a complaint with Lisa Madigan’s office in Illinois. The follow quotes are taken from Truth Wins Out’s press release, which is available here:
truthwinsout.org/news/?p=53
From Mr. Besen’s letter to the Attorney General:
Clearly, Mr. Besen asserts that AFT and Peter LaBarbera are selling the video in question. It is now unfortunately clear that Mr. Besen is in error in regard to this fact. In order to retain the right to claim that his “truth wins out,” it seems necessary for him to address this untruth into which he has unwittingly fallen. If he does not take this step (which must be truly humbling, no doubt) then what was an unintentional error will quickly (in my opinion) become an intentional one. If he holds onto an untruth, then he is not holding onto the truth.
I apologize if my words are obnoxious to you. They have been directed to all participants in this commentary, but especially to the hosts of Ex-Gay Watch. It is not my intention or wish to attack you or Mr. Besen. When I wrote, “I wish you folk to be better than the Christians you oppose,” my purpose was not to say that you oppose only Christians, though indeed in this particular instance you are…yes…standing in opposition to Christian groups (me too). My purpose was to encourage you to be better than the two Christian groups that are at issue here: the American Family Association and Americans for Truth–neither of which seem to be able to accept the truth when it comes to them. My encouragement stands. For my poorly articulated thought, I apologize. For not providing the necessary references to back up the facts, I also apologize.
You are absolutely right, Mr. Roberts, that I have not been reading Ex-Gay Watch for over a year. I left after a few months of hanging out here in 2005, after observing very similar ugly and disheartening exchanges go unaddressed by the hosts. Now, I don’t expect every instance of misconduct to be listed and commenters charged, but in this instance Mr. Besen’s repeated use of (forgive me for repeating it) “Porno Pete” has gone unchecked while Mr. Brummer’s pointed, and perhaps painful truth about Mr. Besen’s misstep has been clearly identified as “unacceptable commentary.”
I understand your position on ideologies and evangelism at Ex-Gay Watch, but it seems to me that Mr. Brummer’s suggestions and advice toward nonviolent action are very appropo to this particular post, where we are discussing the relative merits of Mr. Besen’s methods. You are correct that I am motivated to speak up for Joe, because of my fondness for him (though I don’t know him personally at all, I just agree with him and enjoy his posts at Soulforce.org). Likewise, I expect your comments here are motivated by your apparent dislike of his stance on nonviolence, and you approval of Wayne Besen. Neither of us are objective, which lends an invigorating passion to our posts. 🙂
OK, let me get this straight. There was a series of back and forth exchanges between Wayne and Joe, both of whom I personally admire and respect. After the last note from Joe, David called it to a halt. It appears that Dash believes that the admonishment was meant for Joe only. However, the language and attitude to which David referred, I took to be directed at both men. Am I correct in this?
Back on topic: to sell something doesn’t necessarily require that money change hands, such as selling an idea or prospect. Or in this case the promoting of a certain material as true and legitimate. However, the request in the complaint that monies be refunded to dissatisfied customers does imply that a physical sale occurred. But I don’t see that as a deliberate misrepresentation.
As was stated above, I think the complaint bring well needed publicity to the organization and their hate filled messege. I think it should be the beginning. Take Joe’s advice and go after the AFA next.
However, the language and attitude to which David referred, I took to be directed at both men. Am I correct in this?
You are correct. I mentioned that the language being used was inappropriate here. With multiple instances, there simply was no reason to list them all.
Back on topic: to sell something doesn’t necessarily require that money change hands, such as selling an idea or prospect. Or in this case the promoting of a certain material as true and legitimate.
I agree, it is beneficial to LaBarbera’s work for this video to both exist and be promoted as accurate – that is a benefit all on it’s own. But I don’t see how he can give refunds to purchasers if they purchased it elsewhere – he has nothing to refund. I suppose there might be some civil suit there if he promoted it as accurate and the purchase was made under that endorsement, but I’m not an attorney.
Uh oh…
Regan, astonished at the dialogue…is wondering whether to comment or tip toe backwards away from this thread.
:O(
Only ’cause words seem to have failed me…
Go ahead, Regan. Place the thread firmly back on topic and let the personal arguements cease.
Regan without something to say? You gotta be kidding me 🙂
Comment away!!
My TWO cents, for what it’s worth.
I think Wayne may have erred in going after the wrong party. I also note that Johnston doesn’t actually claim to be “cured” in the video and the video doesn’t push a “cure” (though he is introduced as a “former homosexual”). That isn’t the focus of the video. Instead if is all about how evil the “homosexual lifestyle” is. Rather than pro-ex-gay, it’s really just anti-gay – from the perspective of a total sleaze that had “been there”.
Nonetheless, I really doubt that many folks seriously thing the state will censor this video because Johnston had a “fall”. And there isn’t any cure being sold in the video so I don’t see how it could be fraud.
What Wayne is doing, however, is raise attention to Johnston’s evil behavior, which is relevant because he’s back at being a speaker for anti-gay activism. And whether or not I agree with the advisability of the effort, it has gotten some folks talking.
I always respect your view, you seem to articluate things much better than I ever seem to be able to do!