Gay in St. Louis? Get cured on Feb. 25th!

[Upchurch]

So, earlier this month these rather annoying billboards (http://www.exodus.to/news_2006_0209PR.shtml) started popping up saying things like, "I questioned my homosexuality. Change is possible. www.exodus.to (http://www.exodus.to/)"

As you can imagine, it wasn't long before the shouting began. I've already received a number of emails from a number of different local groups wanting to organize protests. The billboards have been vandilized (each side blaming the other). Yadda, yadda, yadda.

First, I'd like to say that I think this Exodus International group is full of baloney. I like to use the analogy of being left handed (which I am). I was born left handed. I've always been left handed. I can write with my right hand and, with a little practice, I might even fool someone into thinking that I am right handed. Heck, I might even convince myself that I'm really right handed. It does not change the fact that I have a predisposition to be left handed.

That being said, I'm really of two minds about this conference. On the one hand, they have every right to congregate peacebly and speak their minds. They should be albe to do this unmolested. On the other hand, I feel that they are spreading damaging and hurtful misinformation and promising that which is ultimately impossible.

Listening to the local conservative talk radio station on the way to work this morning, it was their opinion that it was wrong to call the Exodus people "brown shirts" (I don't know who was doing this) or to protest outside of their convention because it trampled on their first amendment rights. My question is why not?

If they are behaving in a way that I find unacceptable, is it not also my right to express that opinion through peaceble protest, or some other format?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

These people are clearly idiots. To me, if you go and protest, you are only drawing attention to them and legitimizing their "conference". I say it's better to just ignore them. It's not like you're going to change anyone's mind.

I mean, if someone held a conference claiming the earth was flat, would you go and protest?

[Upchurch]

These people are clearly idiots. To me, if you go and protest, you are only drawing attention to them and legitimizing their "conference". I say it's better to just ignore them. It's not like you're going to change anyone's mind. Well, I didn't mean me specifically. I already have the day booked solid. I was thinking more philosophically.

I mean, if someone held a conference claiming the earth was flat, would you go and protest?No, but if there was a "Let's get ID into Missouri schools" conference, I probably would. We all have our hot button issues. ID and anti-gay bigotry are mine.

[JamesDillon]

The freedom of speech necessarily includes the freedom of opposing speech. Staging a protest objecting to the message being spread by this group is not inconsistent with recognizing its right to spread that message; it's simply an exercise of one's own right to express criticism. (Obviously, if the protesters are physically intimidating the organization's members or audience, or attempting in some way to interfere with the group's meeting, that crosses the line and is unacceptable).

[bob_kark]

[token funny response]Thank God they finally found a cure! Phew! Does it only work for people living in St. Louis?[/token funny response]

Seriously, this is outrageous! They're comparing homosexuality to a disease. Like some kind of Leper colony. They have to know that no homosexuals are going to want to be "cured." So they're basically attempting to insult the entire gay community while appearing as if they're actually helping them. The thing that absolutely pisses me off the most about this is that they claim to be representing a faith that is based on tolerance, understanding, and compassion, yet every chance they get to practice what they preach, they merely wipe their postierior with the very book they find so holy and then disguise it as trying to help their community. So not only are they acting like complete hypocrites, they're duplicitous when doing so.

Of course, I know this isn't the first time or last time people have done this. But, it brings images of the KKK to mind. It burns me when I think about them sitting down at a table having a laugh at the "queers." Maybe you should burn a rainbow on their front lawn.

[Kopji]

I think the left-handedness example is apropos, except it lacks the large social consequences that homosexuality sometimes does. Although there are probably lefties that wish they were righties, they do not risk losing job, family, and friends over it.

An objection to the meetings are that instead of working toward acceptance and integration, it promotes a fictional solution. That alone is probably worth protesting.

I don't doubt that there are people out there who 'try out' homosexuality as a kind of faddish social experiment. The meetings then play the role of a miracle healing center. You walk in homosexual and then out the door miraculously 'cured'. pray your way to mental health

The darker side as noted, are the homosexuals who would attend to try and escape the social conditions created by the very same religious people now offering to 'cure them'.

I don't know the answer on the protesting. Sometimes I work to defeat something by protesting it, and sometimes by standing up for alternate ideas.
The alternate ideas in this case would be acceptance and better integration into society for homosexuals.

I suppose you could do both - protest AND promote alternate ideas

[pgwenthold]

This is a classic situation of someone saying something idiotic, and then when they get criticized for it, they hide behind "It's not fair to criticize me, because I'm entitled to my opinion."

Watch for it - it is extremely popular on the internet. So much so, that I would put it up there as probably my second rule of internet discussion: Be wary of those who try to stifle free speech by claiming they are only exercising free speech.

(for what it is worth, the first rule is, "Regardless of the topic, assume someone in the discussion knows more about it than you do." This is less of an issue in places where the posters know each other very well, but as a general rule of thumb it is a good idea; for example, even though I know an awful lot about the Wizard of Oz, I still am not surprised when someone around here knows more about various aspects than I do; OTOH, I am pretty extreme in this aspect, and am not out of my league with even the top experts in the world on the topic)

The discussion is usually something like:
[moron]: blah blah blah
[resounding attack]: that's silly, and here's why X, Y, Z.
[moron]: I don't deserve all these personal attacks. I was just stating my opinion, and I have a right to do that.

Apparently, however, if you state your opinion, no one else has the right to state their opinion that your opinion is idiotic because that goes against your right to free speech.

Same deal here. Morons in St Louis have the right to have a convention to cure all the homosexuals they want. OTOH, others have the right to protest those conventions.

That being said, I'd recommend against it, even if you were free. The best way to deal with such nonsense is to not legitimize it as worth anyone's time.

[Manny]

[token funny response]Thank God they finally found a cure! Phew! Does it only work for people living in St. Louis?[/token funny response]And here I was opening the thread hoping that a cure had been discovered for being in St. Louis.

[TragicMonkey]

Seriously, this is outrageous! They're comparing homosexuality to a disease. Like some kind of Leper colony. They have to know that no homosexuals are going to want to be "cured." So they're basically attempting to insult the entire gay community while appearing as if they're actually helping them. The thing that absolutely pisses me off the most about this is that they claim to be representing a faith that is based on tolerance, understanding, and compassion, yet every chance they get to practice what they preach, they merely wipe their postierior with the very book they find so holy and then disguise it as trying to help their community. So not only are they acting like complete hypocrites, they're duplicitous when doing so.

I disagree. It's entirely possible that the people behind this honestly believe that a) homosexuality is just behavioral and therefore can be changed, and b) that it's sinful in the eyes of their god. They are wrong, but they can't be hypocrites unless they know that they're wrong.

And there are gays who want to be "cured". The ones who buy into the religion, the ones who are unable to deal with the disapproval of their families or community or society, the ones who are just freaked out by their own sexuality. There is no shortage of f***ed up people, after all. The tragedy is that "conversion" just doesn't work; the ones who fool themselves into thinking it does and has are going to be even more unhappy.

This sort of thing is very sad. The people behind it might have good intentions, by their lights, but what they're doing is preying on the insecurities and fears of unhappy people. (That's religion for ya.) I feel sorry for both the attendees and the organizers, that neither group can appreciate the rich diversity of the human experience for what it is, but want to narrow it down and retool it because it frightens them.

[pgwenthold]

I think the left-handedness example is apropos, except it lacks the large social consequences that homosexuality sometimes does. Although there are probably lefties that wish they were righties, they do not risk losing job, family, and friends over it.


Sounds to me like the problem is society, not gay people.

[TragicMonkey]

I think the left-handedness example is apropos, except it lacks the large social consequences that homosexuality sometimes does.

Funnily enough, I just read of a study that claimed that gays are more likely to be left-handed than the rest of the population is.

[Upchurch]

I think the left-handedness example is apropos, except it lacks the large social consequences that homosexuality sometimes does. Although there are probably lefties that wish they were righties, they do not risk losing job, family, and friends over it. True, but that's what I like about the comparison. It removes the situation from all the existing emotional baggage.

It's true that I could learn to be right-handed and live the rest of my life as a right-handed person. But, what are the odds that I'm not going to slip when something is thrown at me and I react to catch it with my left hand? Fundamentally, I'm still left-handed.

The darker side as noted, are the homosexuals who would attend to try and escape the social conditions created by the very same religious people now offering to 'cure them'. In the name of "love", no less.

Love is hate. War is peace.

[TragicMonkey]

Love is hate. War is peace.

Love is a battlefield!

[Upchurch]

Funnily enough, I just read of a study that claimed that gays are more likely to be left-handed than the rest of the population is.
Get out of here. Got a link?

[Upchurch]

Love is a battlefield!
That's so gay. I'll pray for you.

[thaiboxerken]

The funny thing about the RR. If you protest what they are saying, you are "violating their freedom of speech." If they protest what you are saying, they aren't violating yours.

Heads I win, tails you lose..

[pgwenthold]

The funny thing about the RR. If you protest what they are saying, you are "violating their freedom of speech." If they protest what you are saying, they aren't violating yours.



This isn't just a property of the RR. A lot of people with fundamentally unsupportable positions tend to lean on this copout.

[TragicMonkey]

Get out of here. Got a link?

Not to the news story I read. I did some Googling and found two studies that came to the same conclusion, both Canadian. The one I read about was probably the 2006 one, by "Dr. Kenneth Zucker of the University of Toronto" which appeared either in "Psychology Today" or "Psychological Bulletin" (or maybe both...I'm coming up with hits claiming both or either. Internet reporting, eh?)

Even more oddly, Zucker's study apparently concluded that while gay men are 34% more likely to be left handed than straight men are, lesbians are a whopping 91% more likely to be left handed than straight women are!

[thaiboxerken]

Hmm. I wonder if they could go the other way with this. I think being gay might be a good lifestyle for me. Think they'd agree to turn me into a homosexual if that's what I wanted?

[Upchurch]

Hmm. I wonder if they could go the other way with this. I think being gay might be a good lifestyle for me. Think they'd agree to turn me into a homosexual if that's what I wanted?
Well, here's (http://www.exodus.to/exodus_faqs_success.shtml#homosexual) the process they use to go from gay to straight:
How does a homosexual person change?
We believe freedom from homosexuality is increasingly experienced as men and women mature through ongoing submission to the lordship of Christ and His Church. This transformation enables him or her to shed the old, sinful identity and in its place learn new ways of relating to self and others. Working through underlying relational and abuse problems is a significant component in this process. Making use of individual and pastoral counseling, support groups, personal Bible study, and a same-sex discipleship group are beneficial.
so, to go the other way, you'll have to not submit to the lordship of Christ and His Church and start having some underlying relational and abuse problems. ...maybe have some mixed-sex discipleship groups, but that seems counter intuitive.


eta: Good Ed! The FAQ's are comedy rich!

[pgwenthold]

You call "Freedom from Homosexuality Event," gays call it "Find a Date Opportunity."

There was a Will and Grace episode about this type of thing, with Neil Patrick Harris (Doogie Howser).

"Attention people, if you came just as an excuse to meet other gay people, please leave."

And everyone gets up and leaves.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Well, I didn't mean me specifically. I already have the day booked solid. I was thinking more philosophically.


Sorry, yes I didn't mean you specifically. I was using "you" as in those who were planning to protest.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

No, but if there was a "Let's get ID into Missouri schools" conference, I probably would. We all have our hot button issues. ID and anti-gay bigotry are mine.

I think the difference there is that they are now trying to force their loony ideas on us as opposed to just talking about them among the inbred conference attendees.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Funnily enough, I just read of a study that claimed that gays are more likely to be left-handed than the rest of the population is.

Based upon the available evidence, I will now conclude that Upchurch is gay. :p

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Not to the news story I read. I did some Googling and found two studies that came to the same conclusion, both Canadian. The one I read about was probably the 2006 one, by "Dr. Kenneth Zucker of the University of Toronto" which appeared either in "Psychology Today" or "Psychological Bulletin" (or maybe both...I'm coming up with hits claiming both or either. Internet reporting, eh?)

Even more oddly, Zucker's study apparently concluded that while gay men are 34% more likely to be left handed than straight men are, lesbians are a whopping 91% more likely to be left handed than straight women are!

What I get from this is that Canadians are gay.

[headscratcher4]

But, even if they "cured" someone of being "gay" -- wouldn't that person still be in St. Louis? I mean, it might take away the only reason that person has for living....I mean, there they were, happy, "gay" with intersting places to go in the Central West End...and suddenly they're living in Fenton and working at the IHOP. How can that be a good thing?

;)

[The Central Scrutinizer]

But, even if they "cured" someone of being "gay" -- wouldn't that person still be in St. Louis? I mean, it might take away the only reason that person has for living....I mean, there they were, happy, "gay" with intersting places to go in the Central West End...and suddenly they're living in Fenton and working at the IHOP. How can that be a good thing?

;)

The lucky ones would get to live in Fenton and work at IHOP. The unlucky would have to live in Crystal City and work at White Castle!

[Upchurch]

I think the difference there is that they are now trying to force their loony ideas on us as opposed to just talking about them among the inbred conference attendees.
ah. That is true.

[headscratcher4]

The lucky ones would get to live in Fenton and work at IHOP. The unlucky would have to live in Crystal City and work at White Castle!

Ha, the jokes on you! I don't think there is a White Castle in Crystal City...

[Upchurch]

But, even if they "cured" someone of being "gay" -- wouldn't that person still be in St. Louis?
See, the funny thing is, I find this more offensive than being called gay.

Wow. I am so left-handed.

[headscratcher4]

See, the funny thing is, I find this more offensive than being called gay.

Wow. I am so left-handed.

Do they let people in St. Louis who went to the same high school get married?

Its a den of iniquity I tell you! Next thing you know they'll be letting them adopt!

[Upchurch]

Do they let people in St. Louis who went to the same high school get married?Given the number of single sex high schools, that ties directly back into this dicussion.

[headscratcher4]

Given the number of single sex high schools, that ties directly back into this dicussion.

Hmmm...no wonder Missouri gave the world John Ashcroft.

[Upchurch]

Hmmm...no wonder Missouri gave the world John Ashcroft.
We elected a dead man over Ashcroft. How were we to know that would free him up for a higher post with more power?

[TragicMonkey]

We elected a dead man over Ashcroft.

Sunk either way. With his necromancy powers, Ashcroft has control over the dead.

[Piscivore]

Even more oddly, Zucker's study apparently concluded that while gay men are 34% more likely to be left handed than straight men are, lesbians are a whopping 91% more likely to be left handed than straight women are!

Funny, I've never found lesbians to be particularly sinister.

[TragicMonkey]

Funny, I've never found lesbians to be particularly sinister.

That's because the really sinister ones are the ones you don't know are lesbians. Those black helicopters? Oh, yeah. They're full of lesbians. Hot, sinister lesbians. Massaging each other with oil, and maybe kissing a little. Sinister!

[NotJesus]

It's true that I could learn to be right-handed and live the rest of my life as a right-handed person. But, what are the odds that I'm not going to slip when something is thrown at me and I react to catch it with my left hand?

That wouldn't give you away. If you grew up playing baseball righthanded, it would be perfectly natural to catch with your left hand.

[NotJesus]

That's because the really sinister ones are the ones you don't know are lesbians. Those black helicopters? Oh, yeah. They're full of lesbians. Hot, sinister lesbians. Massaging each other with oil, and maybe kissing a little. Sinister!


Mmmmmmm... sinister, oily lesbians... [drooooolll...]

[Soapy Sam]

Well, either homosexuality is genetic or it's not. If it's not, then all the arguments about it being a lifestyle choice are revived.

If it is, then in some ways it is like a disease, in that it's to a specific degree heritable and so may well be "curable" by genetic intervention. As may left handedness, being white and maybe being a Republican.

If we use genetics to "justify" homosexuality, then it's fair to use genetics to suggest a mechanism to avoid it.

On the other hand, if it's a lifestyle choice, then folk can choose to change. Just as they can choose to vote for someone else at the next election.


On the third hand, maybe it's just a waste of money.

[TragicMonkey]

Well, either homosexuality is genetic or it's not. If it's not, then all the arguments about it being a lifestyle choice are revived.


Not necessarily. A condition can be physical without being genetic. Like if the theories about exposure to various chemicals while in the womb hold water, or if it turns out to be an accidental arrangement of brain architecture.

[Piscivore]

If we use genetics to "justify" homosexuality, then it's fair to use genetics to suggest a mechanism to avoid it.

On the other hand, if it's a lifestyle choice, then folk can choose to change. Just as they can choose to vote for someone else at the next election.


Either way, I wouldn't want to live in a world without helicopters full of sinister oily lesbians.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Well, either homosexuality is genetic or it's not. If it's not, then all the arguments about it being a lifestyle choice are revived.

If it is, then in some ways it is like a disease, in that it's to a specific degree heritable and so may well be "curable" by genetic intervention. As may left handedness, being white and maybe being a Republican.

If we use genetics to "justify" homosexuality, then it's fair to use genetics to suggest a mechanism to avoid it.

On the other hand, if it's a lifestyle choice, then folk can choose to change. Just as they can choose to vote for someone else at the next election.


On the third hand, maybe it's just a waste of money.

So if it is genetic, then it could be cured by genetic intervention. So the right wing nuts would be all for it! Except that we would learn how to perform this procedure via stem cell research. Which the right wing nuts oppose. If they think about it too hard, their brains will lock up. :D

[Piscivore]

Not necessarily. A condition can be physical without being genetic. Like if the theories about exposure to various chemicals while in the womb hold water, or if it turns out to be an accidental arrangement of brain architecture.

Man, thanks to "House" and "Ring" I just learned about people who are genetically male yet "naturally" look like really hot girls. In that sort of world, doesn't the whole idea of exclusively simple dichotomous human sexuality go right out on its ass?

[bob_kark]

I disagree. It's entirely possible that the people behind this honestly believe that a) homosexuality is just behavioral and therefore can be changed, and b) that it's sinful in the eyes of their god. They are wrong, but they can't be hypocrites unless they know that they're wrong.

And there are gays who want to be "cured". The ones who buy into the religion, the ones who are unable to deal with the disapproval of their families or community or society, the ones who are just freaked out by their own sexuality. There is no shortage of f***ed up people, after all. The tragedy is that "conversion" just doesn't work; the ones who fool themselves into thinking it does and has are going to be even more unhappy.

This sort of thing is very sad. The people behind it might have good intentions, by their lights, but what they're doing is preying on the insecurities and fears of unhappy people. (That's religion for ya.) I feel sorry for both the attendees and the organizers, that neither group can appreciate the rich diversity of the human experience for what it is, but want to narrow it down and retool it because it frightens them.

Sorry for the late reply, I'm busy busy!

Anyway, I'd say that at best they're willfully ignorant. You'd think that someone who claims they can cure homosexuality would possibly invest at least 10 seconds to researching it. So, I don't buy it. Just like how I don't buy the glowing testimonial:

"I questioned my homosexuality. Change is possible. www.exodus.to"


Seriously, who says that? I would love to believe what you said, but I just can't.

[Manny]

Man, thanks to "House" and "Ring" I just learned about people who are genetically male yet "naturally" look like really hot girls. In that sort of world, doesn't the whole idea of exclusively simple dichotomous human sexuality go right out on its ass?So to speak.

[Upchurch]

Seriously, who says that?The marketing department.

[Kopji]

heh heh heh. I'm sorry, their article has a couple of darkly funny parts.

The one-day event focuses on the hope and help available for those struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction through the personal testimonies of those who have left homosexuality themselves.

"I... was a teenage homosexual".
But I got better.
This group of ex-homosexuals has really helped me... control my urges... ack urp! They are like brothers to me. Kind thoughtful ones. with long eyelashes.
Code red! INTERVENTION needed in conference room 6!

"We are sponsoring these billboards in the hopes that many in St. Louis will, possibly for the first time, question what they have been told about homosexuality," said Alan Chambers, a featured speaker at the Love Won Out conference... and yet, there are hundreds of thousands of individuals, like me, whose lives contradict this claim...

Look mommy! There's pastor Dan on that billboard! He's so great! I love him.

"Popular culture says we don't exist, but we do," said Chambers. "Freedom from homosexuality is a reality and we want others to see our faces, hear our stories and consider a side to this issue they may have never heard before."

Discussion topic:
"Heterosexual 102" - How to resist your unwanted attraction for members of the same sex.


over 400,000 people who contact the ministry each year.

Hello? Is this the national homosexual help hotline? I had an urge today. -Sob-I'm such a backslider.

No problem 'mam. We'll have our anti-homosexeeual squad come right over. We're here to help.

[Charlie Monoxide]

This same billboards have been posted on a major commercial thoroughfare (Orange Blossom Trail) in Orlando here since I rolled into town last June (2005). One of my co-workers flies in from South Carolina every month or so is happily gay (and in his 50's). I joked with him that according to these billboards he too, can change his "evil" lifestyle. Somehow he wasn't much interested.

My heart goes out to any gay individuals who already are dealing with their sexuality, getting influenced by this pure BS. Nothing like trying to lay a "guilt trip" on people who have to live in a sea of homophobia.

I've been lucky to know many gays (I use that term for both men and women), heck, I've even lived in the Castro in SF for about 8 months back in 2001. I'm always interested at when the gay individual discovered that they were "different" (typically from ages 7-11), and more interestingly how their families treated them after they came out. In my experience, pretty well all of them (except for one Muslim Inidan, suffering from AIDS), their families totally supported them and their calling in life. Kinda makes you even respect Cheney and his daughter.

What kind of imperfect god would create gay people? Is it a test of the evangelicals of how well they convert these hetereosexual "misfits"?

Charlie (white supremist will be marching through black neighborhoods this weekend in Orlando) Monoxide

[Regnad Kcin]

...This sort of thing is very sad. The people behind it might have good intentions, by their lights, but what they're doing is preying on the insecurities and fears of unhappy people. (That's religion for ya.) I feel sorry for both the attendees and the organizers, that neither group can appreciate the rich diversity of the human experience for what it is, but want to narrow it down and retool it because it frightens them.Well said.

I have a former daughter-in-law who is envangelical and has taken part in such counseling and Bible study sessions with homosexuals in attempts to get them straight with God, so to speak. A gentle, intelligent, generous person. You know...the ones you have to watch out for because they're gentle, intelligent and generous.

Incidentally:I feel sorry for both the attendees and the organizers, that neither group can appreciate the rich diversity of the human experience for what it is, but want to narrow it down and retool it...[Beavis and Butthead]

Heh-heh-heh-heh.

[/B&B]

[Skeptic]

Even more oddly, Zucker's study apparently concluded that while gay men are 34% more likely to be left handed than straight men are, lesbians are a whopping 91% more likely to be left handed than straight women are!

For rather obvious reasons...

(Goes and hides in a box)

[Gwyn ap Nudd]

As long as we are talking about concenting adults who listen to these kooks and decide for themselves to undergo their "treatment," then the light-hearted philosophical banter is appropriate.

But Exodus is the same group that ran "Love in Action," the concentration camp in Tennessee (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=40500&highlight=%22love+action%22+Zack)that was just shut down. In that camp, they took in underage teenagers whose parents signed them up against their will and subjected them to practices that bordered on abuse.*

*I can only claim that they "bordered on" abuse because the first state agency that investigated them claimed to find no evidence of abuse (although the language made it clear that the investigators wrote the report with whitewash instead of ink). The second investigation is the one that closed them down, but only on the technicality that they had no licensed professionals -- not that they would have been able to find any that agreed with their techniques.

[bignickel]

And here I was opening the thread hoping that a cure had been discovered for being in St. Louis.

I have discovered that cure, and have implemented it. :)

[Cleon]

You know, Upchurch, what y'all ought to do is go protest the site, only instead of "Go away hatemongers" and stuff like that, have the signs read "Single, Gay, and Available!"

That'll do WAY more to disrupt the conference than a simple picket. :D

[Manny]

You know, Upchurch, what y'all ought to do is go protest the site, only instead of "Go away hatemongers" and stuff like that, have the signs read "Single, Gay, and Available!"I was at an anti-Phelps rally when he came to town a few years ago and the chant was "Ten percent is not enough -- recruit, recruit, recruit!"

[Mycroft]

Listening to the local conservative talk radio station on the way to work this morning, it was their opinion that it was wrong to call the Exodus people "brown shirts" (I don't know who was doing this) or to protest outside of their convention because it trampled on their first amendment rights. My question is why not?

It looks like a no-brainer to me.

These people are exercising their first amendment rights in claiming that homosexuality is somethig that can be cured.

Their opponents are also exercising their first amendment rights in calling them brown shirts and protesting outside their convention.

There is nothing in the first amendment that protects anyone from facing disagreement to their opinions.

[Kerberos]

Man, thanks to "House" and "Ring" I just learned about people who are genetically male yet "naturally" look like really hot girls. In that sort of world, doesn't the whole idea of exclusively simple dichotomous human sexuality go right out on its ass?
Wait, are you trying to apply logic to the thinking of fundamentalists? That's a really bad idea, that way lies madness,

[Bikewer]

One of the pop-science magazines had a cover article on the "can homosexuality be cured" question last week. I skimmed through it, and the author talked about the continuum of homosexuality; hardly the either/or situation envisioned by many.
It was the general thrust of the article that IF you had an individual who was one of the rather rare sometimes-straight sometimes-gay type, and subjected this person to some sort of therapy at the right time, you might achieve a situation where they would identify therafter as being straight.

This was considered to be a very unlikely situation, however.
Unfortunately, I can't recall which mag had the article. (New Scientist? I'll try to find a reference.)

[Achán hiNidráne]

The funny thing about the RR. If you protest what they are saying, you are "violating their freedom of speech." If they protest what you are saying, they aren't violating yours.

Heads I win, tails you lose..
Let's not forget this golden oldie: "I'm not a bigot because I oppose homosexuality! I'm following my faith! YOU'RE the real bigot for opposing my faith!"

[Achán hiNidráne]

And there are gays who want to be "cured". The ones who buy into the religion, the ones who are unable to deal with the disapproval of their families or community or society, the ones who are just freaked out by their own sexuality. There is no shortage of f***ed up people, after all. The tragedy is that "conversion" just doesn't work; the ones who fool themselves into thinking it does and has are going to be even more unhappy.
I really feel sorry for those people; the one's who because of the barbaric bigotry of their family and neighbors feel they have to "change" their sexuality based on a premise as irrational as "the word of God." These people have been guilt-tripped by the rest of society into hating themselves, their identities, and their desires. From my persepective, that's a disgusting act.

The people behind it might have good intentions, by their lights, but what they're doing is preying on the insecurities and fears of unhappy people.
I don't care about the "good intentions" of the Bible-beating scum-suckers who con these depressed and confussed people. In point of fact, I doubt their intentions are driven by anything that you or I could catagorize as being "good." They are driven by nothing less than hate and the desire to control others.

Therefore, they deserve nothing better than our contempt.

[Cleon]

I really feel sorry for those people; the one's who because of the barbaric bigotry of their family and neighbors feel they have to "change" their sexuality based on a premise as irrational as "the word of God." These people have been guilt-tripped by the rest of society into hating themselves, their identities, and their desires. From my persepective, that's a disgusting act.


I don't care about the "good intentions" of the Bible-beating scum-suckers who con these depressed and confussed people. In point of fact, I doubt their intentions are driven by anything that you or I could catagorize as being "good." They are driven by nothing less than hate and the desire to control others.

Therefore, they deserve nothing better than our contempt.


:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I don't care about the "good intentions" of the Bible-beating scum-suckers who con these depressed and confussed people. In point of fact, I doubt their intentions are driven by anything that you or I could catagorize as being "good." They are driven by nothing less than hate and the desire to control others.


And to have another member of the "flock" to throw money in the collection basket.

[Mephisto]

We all have our hot button issues. ID and anti-gay bigotry are mine.

I agree and advocate getting anyone who has been mistreated or targeted by good Christians together to make a lot more noise. If those protesting racial discrimination could combine with those protesting anti-gay prejudice, could combine with those protesting ID in schools we'd have a much louder voice.

Unfortunately, there are gays who racially discriminate, there are racially diverse people who are against gay rights and some people of both groups who buy into ID. I'm not gay, but wouldn't hesitate to march for gay rights. I'm not an illegal alien, but I'd march for their rights to be treated as humans. I'm not a tree-hugger, but I'd march for to have more attention paid to the environment. It seems to me that if we can see beyond those limiting labels we'll find that most of us are really sick of those few who believe their "holy book" gives them license to run our lives.

Now if we could only speak out as one voice against them . . .

[luchog]

I really feel sorry for those people; the one's who because of the barbaric bigotry of their family and neighbors feel they have to "change" their sexuality based on a premise as irrational as "the word of God." These people have been guilt-tripped by the rest of society into hating themselves, their identities, and their desires. From my persepective, that's a disgusting act.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00009MEB8

[De_Bunk]

I'm an obnoxious, "know i'm always right" ***** for brains..

Can they cure me of that...?

If one man wants to touch another mans ass...and the other man agrees...Who gives a f***...

As long as it ain't my ass they covet...

DB

[Luke T.]

Okay. So I'm in this gay bar on the wrong end of Bourbon Street in New Orleans. Out on the balcony with my girlfriend. I forget why we decided to go to a gay bar.

So this gay man approaches us and we strike up a conversation.

Okay, who turned on the porno film soundtrack! Bow-chicka-chicka-chicka-bow-bow!

Stop that!

So anyway, this gay guy starts saying over and over, "I hate being gay." Real melancholy.

So this makes me curious. Why? Why do you hate being gay Gay Man?

"I just hate being gay."

Is it because of the social stigma?

No.

Then why?

"I don't know. I just hate being gay."

Is it because you were taught it was sinful?

No.

Then why?

"I don't know. I just hate being gay."

It goes on like this for several minutes. Me, trying to think of every reason a person could hate for being gay. Him, saying, no, that's not it.

I never got an answer to this riddle.

So, it being New Orleans and all, my girlfriend lifts her top and shows him her tits.

Doesn't work. He's still gay and hating it.

[Upchurch]

I'm an obnoxious, "know i'm always right" ***** for brains..

Can they cure me of that...?Dunno. You willing to accept God's glory or some other BS?

[Luke T.]

Not to rain on anyone's gay pride parade, but is it possible that some people are gay/lesbian as a result of prior sexual abuse or rape? You know, the man-hater. Whatever.

Not that I recommend they see Jimmy Swaggert for this problem, but some people out there do need counseling.

[Upchurch]

Not to rain on anyone's gay pride parade, but is it possible that some people are gay/lesbian as a result of prior sexual abuse or rape? Trauma could cause a interesting range of side effects, sexual or otherwise. But, I don't understand how it rains on the parade.

[Luke T.]

Trauma could cause a interesting range of side effects, sexual or otherwise. But, I don't understand how it rains on the parade.

I just wanted to point it out in the interest of fairness. Sometimes there is a reflex to completely reject the opposition's position in its entirety. While the religious right might be wrong for the most part, there is a grain of truth to be found in their position.

[Regnad Kcin]

I just wanted to point it out in the interest of fairness. Sometimes there is a reflex to completely reject the opposition's position in its entirety. While the religious right might be wrong for the most part, there is a grain of truth to be found in their position.I think this is very wise.

Also, when will your girlfriend be in New Orleans again?

[Luke T.]

I think this is very wise.

Also, when will your girlfriend be in New Orleans again?

:D :D :D

[Kerberos]

Okay. So I'm in this gay bar on the wrong end of Bourbon Street in New Orleans. Out on the balcony with my girlfriend. I forget why we decided to go to a gay bar.

So this gay man approaches us and we strike up a conversation.

Okay, who turned on the porno film soundtrack! Bow-chicka-chicka-chicka-bow-bow!

Stop that!

So anyway, this gay guy starts saying over and over, "I hate being gay." Real melancholy.

So this makes me curious. Why? Why do you hate being gay Gay Man?

"I just hate being gay."

Is it because of the social stigma?

No.

Then why?

"I don't know. I just hate being gay."

Is it because you were taught it was sinful?

No.

Then why?

"I don't know. I just hate being gay."

It goes on like this for several minutes. Me, trying to think of every reason a person could hate for being gay. Him, saying, no, that's not it.

I never got an answer to this riddle.

So, it being New Orleans and all, my girlfriend lifts her top and shows him her tits.

Doesn't work. He's still gay and hating it.
I'm gay and I hate it, can you send picks? :p

[ChristineR]

Child abuse also causes hetrosexuality. The strongest coalition is between girls who were abused (by men) and women who become sex workers or who are promiscuous to a harmful degree.

The simple answer is that it screws people up, badly.

[Upchurch]

Live discussion about the issue (http://www.kwmu.org/listen.html)

I'll post the archived version when it comes out.


eta: this is good from about 11:00 AM CST until no later than 12:00 PM CST.

[Luke T.]

Live discussion about the issue (http://www.kwmu.org/listen.html)

I'll post the archived version when it comes out.


eta: this is good from about 11:00 AM CST until no later than 12:00 PM CST.

So was anyone converted to the Hetero way of life? I have some extra flannel shirts they can have, and know where they can get a good deal on Dogs Playing Poker, and which back issues of Playboy they should have in their bathroom. Do they need anyone to come by and haul their curtains to the dump?

[thaiboxerken]

Too much religious crap in the show.

[Upchurch]

Too much religious crap in the show.Yes, more than I was expecting. I was hoping for more of the psychological stuff that they were talking about at the beginning.

[thaiboxerken]

I wonder. Is a gay Christian sort of like a black member of the KKK?

[Upchurch]

I wonder. Is a gay Christian sort of like a black member of the KKK?
No, because not all Christians are anti-gay. As far as I know, there are no chapters of the KKK that are not anti-black.

[Darat]

I wonder. Is a gay Christian sort of like a black member of the KKK?


Depends on the denomination.

[thaiboxerken]

Yea, but the bible is anti-gay.

[Upchurch]

Yea, but the bible is anti-gay.
Yes, biblical literalists are probably all anti-gay. Those Christians who read the Bible more metaphorically don't always draw the homosexuality = sin conclusion.

[thaiboxerken]

So, the extremely religious Christians are anti-gay. Can a gay person be a biblical literalist without hating himself for being gay?

[Bikewer]

The locally-produced NPR program, St. Louis On The Air, devoted today's hour to this topic. There were five people on the panel, four of whom were clerics of one sort or another. The fifth was a local professor, who injected the only bits of science and rationality.

All of the various "reverends" discussed the situation from a completely religious viewpoint, talking about "what God wants", "what Scripture says" (or doesn't say) and so forth. Only one of the religious types seemed at all rational, finding points of agreement with the professor.

[Darat]

Yea, but the bible is anti-gay.

But don't forget most denominations do not base their beliefs only on a literal interpretation of the bible.

[Darat]

So, the extremely religious Christians are anti-gay. Can a gay person be a biblical literalist without hating himself for being gay?

No idea.

(ETA) However if they do follow the teachings of the New Testament as well as the old then I can't see why not.

[thaiboxerken]

I don't agree, the New Testament also preaches that homosexuality is wrong.

[Darat]

I don't agree, the New Testament also preaches that homosexuality is wrong.

But you asked "...Can a gay person be a biblical literalist without hating himself for being gay?" not whether the New Testament says homosexuality is wrong or not.

[thaiboxerken]

If the NT and the OT says that homosexuality is wrong, how can a biblical literalist homosexual NOT hate him or herself?

[Cleon]

So was anyone converted to the Hetero way of life? I have some extra flannel shirts they can have, and know where they can get a good deal on Dogs Playing Poker, and which back issues of Playboy they should have in their bathroom. Do they need anyone to come by and haul their curtains to the dump?

Playboy? Playboy?!!?!

Quick! Someone get this man some decent pr0n!

[Upchurch]

So, the extremely religious Christians are anti-gay. Can a gay person be a biblical literalist without hating himself for being gay?
Extremely religious is not equivalent to being a Biblical Literalist.

As for a gay biblical literalist, I have no idea. People can and will go to great lengths to make their lives work and one part does not necessarily need to be consistant with other parts.

[Cleon]

Extremely religious is not equivalent to being a Biblical Literalist.

As for a gay biblical literalist, I have no idea. People can and will go to great lengths to make their lives work and one part does not necessarily need to be consistant with other parts.
I, for one, have no problem with this, because I don't believe there IS such a thing as a "Biblical literalist." There are people who claim to be Bibilical literalists, but when you press them about certain contradictions, factual inaccuracies, physical impossibilities, rules that they don't follow (such as kashrus), etc., they start hemming and hawing about interpretations and assumptions.

[thaiboxerken]

Extremely religious is not equivalent to being a Biblical Literalist.

I don't agree at all. If a Christian is extremely religious, they should have to take the Bible at it's word and not introduce their own secular interpretation into it. In otherwords, not try to justify why certain parts of the bible they don't like are not to be believed.

[Kerberos]

So, the extremely religious Christians are anti-gay. Can a gay person be a biblical literalist without hating himself for being gay?
Logically no, but then...

[Thanz]

I don't agree at all. If a Christian is extremely religious, they should have to take the Bible at it's word and not introduce their own secular interpretation into it. In otherwords, not try to justify why certain parts of the bible they don't like are not to be believed.
I disagree. I know that it is a favourite pastime of some athiests to point out the various problems with the Bible and demand that Christians must either take all of it or leave all of it. I don't see a problem with a person believing the "high points" of Christianity while accepting that the Bible was written by people, in a different language than the one they use now, and translated many times. Someone could be extremely religious in that they believe in the Divinity of Jesus, etc. while not believeing a la Phelps that "God hates fags".

[thaiboxerken]

If you pick and choose which parts of the Bible you believe or don't, then you're simply doing so using some sort of secular and not religious reasoning.

[Darat]

If the NT and the OT says that homosexuality is wrong, how can a biblical literalist homosexual NOT hate him or herself?

We'd need to get into a in depth discussion about Christian theology to really answer that but in summary "hate the sin not the sinner" sums up the NT teachings.

[Darat]

I don't agree at all. If a Christian is extremely religious, they should have to take the Bible at it's word and not introduce their own secular interpretation into it.


That may be you defintion but that has never* been the mainstream or even majority Christian viewpoint. The Bible only forms part of the doctrine of faith for the vast majority of people self identifying as Christians.


In otherwords, not try to justify why certain parts of the bible they don't like are not to be believed.

?

[Thanz]

If you pick and choose which parts of the Bible you believe or don't, then you're simply doing so using some sort of secular and not religious reasoning.
What the heck is "religious reasoning"? For that matter, what is "secular reasoning" and what is the difference between the two?

[Tricky]

I'm an obnoxious, "know i'm always right" ***** for brains..

Can they cure me of that...? Well, education can cure the "***** for brains" part... Maybe charm school for the rest.

If one man wants to touch another mans ass...and the other man agrees...Who gives a f***...

As long as it ain't my ass they covet...

Heck they can look if they want, so long as they do it tastefully and with respect.

My motto is, "It's all right to covet, but not to shove it."

[Ohmer]

So, the extremely religious Christians are anti-gay. Can a gay person be a biblical literalist without hating himself for being gay?

How many extremely religious Christians do you think really follow all of the rules in Leviticus? Most violate them daily without hating themselves.

[thaiboxerken]

I think most Christians, if not all, simply pick and choose which parts to believe. I guess that included Biblical literalists as well, since to believe every part of the Bible would involve contradictions in those beliefs. So, I guess the extremely religious could be gay and not hate themselves.

[thaiboxerken]

What the heck is "religious reasoning"? For that matter, what is "secular reasoning" and what is the difference between the two?

Religious reasoning is based on theological and religious premises. Secular reasoning is not.

[Thanz]

Religious reasoning is based on theological and religious premises. Secular reasoning is not.
I don't see them as bright line categories as you appear to. Further, I'd be willing to guess that for you "theological and religious premises" boils down to "the Bible".

Having said that, someone that I know is active in the Anglican Church here in Canada working for greater integration and acceptance of gays and lesbians into the Church community. He has his Masters of Divinity, and almost became a priest. He has no trouble using "religious reasoning" to reconcile his Christianity and not hate himself as homosexual, or even think that there is anything wrong with him being homosexual.

[thaiboxerken]

Sorry, thanz, but I will not get into a semantic debate about every word I use. Christianity is simply a mental disorder.

[Thanz]

Sorry, thanz, but I will not get into a semantic debate about every word I use. Christianity is simply a mental disorder.
I have no desire for a semantic debate. Given your attitude, however, it is clear that you do not understand "religious reasoning" (as you put it) so perhaps you should refrain from making pronouncements about the faith of others and how they can reconcile that faith with their sexual orientation.

[thaiboxerken]

Religious reasoning is that reasoning which is dependant on religious premises, I've already said this. In otherwords, it's religious reasoning that can convince someone that ID is a scientific theory and that Evolution is a religion.

The bible says that homosexuality is an ABOMINATION. Not just a "bad" thing to do, not just a minor failing, not just something that isn't very smart.. but an ABOMINATION, which is a very, very strong word. Gay Christians simply are those who will ignore that the Bible teaches to hate homosexuality just so they can have a piece of the Jesus pie.

[Upchurch]

Archive of yesterday's NPR show. (http://www.kwmu.org/Programs/Slota/archivedetail.php?showid=2078)

[Regnad Kcin]

NPR is so gay.













Sorry, I had a sudden attack of "American." I'm fine now.

[Upchurch]

Sorry, I had a sudden attack of "American." I'm fine now.
Regnad Kcin totally copied American.