With all due respect, Jennifer, there is a difference between a blogger from ex-gay watch posting an abusive, threatening rascist comment to DL and a NARTH article which looks at the “sunny side” of slavery.

The former is a peripheral person in this debate and was “kicked off” ex-gay watch after his comments were exposed. The latter is a professional and expert.

I understand feelings are running high. I think this is a mistake to politicize this process. We have an identity as a scientific organization which is weakened by the poor comparison made above.

Lets blog about science, let’s post articles on science.

David Blakeslee

“Just for complete clarification; you all know all or parts of this:

http://www.exgaywatch.com/blog/archives/2006/08/commenter_adam.html

1. Kautz wasn’t an active commenter — I found only 12 previous comments by him.

2. As has been pointed out already, he made the racist and threatening comments on D.L.’s site, not ours.

3. We banned him anyway because if those comments had been posted at XGW, they would have violated our guidelines. We try not to allow commenters to use XGW as a safe harbor while they conduct unethical or illegal activities elsewhere”.

–Mike (Exgay Watch)

“Why white gays activits(sic)are not apologizing for the repeated acts of racism they engage in?”

“If one could sum up the leadership of the Ex Gay crsuaders (sic) at the hate blog Ex Gay Watch it would be this “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks”.

It is WAY out of line to suggest that all of NARTH’s critics (and the folks at Exgay Watch) are “racist”. Is Dr. Throckmorton racist? He also thinks you should PULL the article and APOLOGIZE.

It is WAY past time for Dr. Nicolosi, Mr. Pruden and whoever may actually be in “charge” of NARTH to respond.

“NARTH values diversity of opinions and freedom of speech, and encourages individual writers.”

Are they JOKING?

Isn’t it ironic? Dontcha think?

“Why white gays activits are not apologizing for the repeated acts of racism they engage in? Do they get a pass?

For the record, I have NEVER engaged in acts of racism nor have I EVER made threats of violence. One WACKO (gay) blogger does not represent the entire gay community. For NARTH to imply this is ridiculous.

First they defend Schoeewolf, then retract him, then defend him and now they seem to accuse all gay “activist” bloggers of being violent hatemongers and racists.

Does ANYONE at NARTH know what is going on at their blog?

Let’s be clear about one thing: As long as the posters remain anonymous, the NARTH blog will always appear to represent the opinions of NARTH to any casual observer, despite disclaimers to the contrary. People dropping in will look at it and just asume that it represents NARTH. If there were a real name, then it could be clear who is expressing what opinion. Anonymity undercuts that, leaving NARTH as the only identifying sponser of the blog.

And of course, this problem is compounded by their heavy-handed censoring of comments, which makes their claim of valuing a variety of opinions ring hollow. I tried posting comments, but they have never seen the light of day. I really don’t think I’m in the habit of posting unreasonable comments (IMO).

So I have to wonder: Are NARTH members aware that the NARTH blog reflects so poorly on the organization — and on the membership by extension?

“Tell your stories here please stand up and make these attacks public. By making it public you are demonstrating the intimidation is not going to work. If we are silent, it will only get worse and may become violent later.”

Come on. Didn’t he/she read any of the coverage of the completely peaceful protest in Indian Wells? Just a bit PARANOID, don’t you think?