RECENT  POSTS:  » Where art thou, Jeremy? » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


If rejecting 'ex-gay' therapy is pro-gay activism, then no wonder Pinnocchio never comes to our rallies

by Jeremy Hooper

You know how we've been telling you about the recent National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) study that their pals at Focus on the Family have been trying to pass off as a "peer-reviewed" "study," even though it's really nothing more than internal PR from a group whose sole mission is to "prove" that gays can "change"? Yea, well, check out the pathological unreason contained in the following snippet. This bullcrappy comes from a recent FOF email blast:


And by the "pro-gay political movement," Focus on the Family of course means to say "scientific truth." Because ya see, whereas their side wants to mold actuality so that it fits their narrow moral purview, the diverse voices on our side are far more desirous of molding their words and ideas around the known world itself. The gay rights movement hasn't been built around any "politically correct" ideas: It's been built around CORRECT ideas, period! On the "ex-gay" subject, that dedication to veracity means listening to what the WHOLE OF THE CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY BELIEVES, which is that "reparative therapy" is, at best, unnecessary and, at worst, horribly damaging.

It's easy to understand why Focus writers (this piece is credited to Tom Minnery) would see our side's work as being born out of scheming and machinations, since those are two founding tenets of their own political movement. But their aggressive mischaracterizations are as offensive to our commitment to the truth as they are offensive to our commitment to our loving partners! Perhaps if they'd stop trying to manipulate life and start actually living it, they would understand just how bizarre, anti-intellectual, and plain MEAN their homo-hostile mental gymnastics come across to those of us who haven't hooked our wagons to this train of "godly" manipulation. Until they do, our side will continue to rely on the "activists" who fuel our own anti-"it's a choice" choo choos: The American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the American Counseling Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the National Association of Social Workers.

Hope for change: new study on homosexuality [FOF email blast]
(H/t: Jonathan Elyea)

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

I'm pretty sure "after reviewing more than 100 years of literature" is really their way of saying "after reviewing over 100-year-old literature".

What do modern psychologists know? We got all the psychological understanding we'll ever need from the Bronze Age.

Posted by: Jonathan | Jul 13, 2009 1:32:16 PM

Don't be to surprise when the anti-gay side uses this story as proof that gays can change:

Posted by: Alonzo | Jul 13, 2009 1:58:58 PM

This is why organizations with religious ties shouldn't have a voice in science.

Posted by: ---- | Jul 13, 2009 6:14:41 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails