Ex-gays as an “orientation” or protected class? Dunno. Those who attempt to write hate-crimes legislation will have to figure that one out.

It is sort of a done deal – Ex-gay is NOT an orientation – at all! However, I appreciate the rest of what you wrote

I don’t support any tit-for-tat kind of strategy for an organization trying to counter false claims of another. It’s a no-win strategy. It’s the game of politics. If there is no strong affirmation to lead with, then give it up.

I was thinking this is good advice for us all in our commenting. Speaking chiefly for/to myself, of course. I ought to have stopped commenting before my last post. I know there will be some productive and interesting discussions here. There is a time for self-restraint, however. Going there now.

“As iron sharpens iron,
so one man sharpens another. ”
Prov. 27:17

Sorry to hear that, according to inerrant biblical standards, you and Lisa are carrying on like men. I suppose any of us can have a relapse.

Eddy,

So years ago you went swimming with Amish boys. There were no girls present. And what, they all confided in you that the thing that attracts them most to women is a hearty smile and kind eyes?

You hung around and “observed” Amish men. OK, leaving aside the creepiness, how did you determine from this that Amish men are more interested in eyes and smiles than breasts and vaginas? Did they say anything to support that, or is your broad conclusion about Amish sexuality based on the fact that these specific men, when observed by you, didn’t stare at T&A? You do understand that, among the Amish (and for that matter in polite mainstream society and in any workplace) it may be socially unacceptable to stare at a woman’s ass, but perfectly socially acceptable to look into a woman’s eyes, especially when conversing. That doesn’t mean that Amish have a completely different understanding of what heterosexuality is.

Maybe you should define heterosexuality as the love of the same sex, and then you’ll be instantly cured.

Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) today condemned a so-called “ex-gay” conference scheduled for Saturday in Anchorage. Love Won Out, which claims to “cure” lesbian and gay people through prayer and spiritual guidance, has been cited as a harmful practice with long-term consequences for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) youth who are often forced to attend, against their will, by parents struggling to deal with a child’s sexual orientation.

This makes unsubstantiated claims, of course. LWO does not claim to “cure” GLBT people. Likewise, saying it was “cited as a harmful practice with long-term consequences” is a low blow. Anyone can “cite” whatever advances their claim. Now, we have APA making it more clear that another side exists. And “often forced to attend”? Come on.

I can’t defend PFOX’s continued use of statements like “Each year thousands of men, women and teens with unwanted same-sex attractions make the personal decision to leave homosexuality.” I tried once to get Regina Griggs or anyone from PFOX to tell me how one arrives at such a claim. I don’t support any tit-for-tat kind of strategy for an organization trying to counter false claims of another. It’s a no-win strategy. It’s the game of politics. If there is no strong affirmation to lead with, then give it up.

Pointing out disingenuous strategies of PFLAG is, of course, not intended to provide a smokescreen or excuse for PFOX.

Ex-gays as an “orientation” or protected class? Dunno. Those who attempt to write hate-crimes legislation will have to figure that one out.

Frankly, I wish someone would come up with an alternative to PFOX. That’s an encouraging thought. There does appear to be a mean-spirited or misguided motive there. They could advocate so much better.

Each year thousands of men, women and teens with unwanted same-sex attractions make the personal decision to leave homosexuality

.

I wanted to make a point. They have no way of knowing this. I was involved in this group and know that they have no way of tracking this, no evidence, no surveys, nothing. It is just made up. If there is some evidence, then they should produce it.

PFOX is not a therapeutic or counseling organization. PFOX supports families, advocates for the ex-gay community, and educates the public on sexual orientation. Each year thousands of men, women and teens with unwanted same-sex attractions make the personal decision to leave homosexuality. However, there are those who refuse to respect that decision. Consequently, formerly gay persons are reviled simply because they dare to exist! Without PFOX, ex-gays would have no voice in a hostile environment.

This could be ok for an organization to do. I don’t agree with their ex-gay is a protected class strategy but sticking up for people who were once gay and want some respect for their course is an ok thing to do. However, then they also say they are a parent’s support group who promote outdated ideas of homosexuality that are offensive to gays. They want to promote those ideas in schools. This activity has little to do with respect for people who have made that choice. It also has little to do with providing parents with a faith based support and information resource.

Have a muddy or multiplied mission is one thing and lots of groups have problems articulating what they are. What is objectionable about PFOX is the way they go about their business. They go beyond spin. The press release on this issue is a good case in point. The whole ex-gay is an orientation is disingenuous. They don’t really believe gay is a protected class, they want to use the language of civil rights to gain visibility. At least this is how it looks to me and is one of the reasons I parted ways. In other words, a group could do any one of the things that PFOX claims to do and do in a way that would not be as offensive and objectionable.

I am aware of one group that may develop as a support for parents who believe in the traditional way that would not be so political and reparative. I hope it works out.