From later context, it appears he’s talking about the ones still willing to appear with NARTH, which is fair, but maybe he can clarify that.

This isn’t a “cheap accusation.” Schoenewolf clearly has some problems with assorted nonwhites, nonstraights, and women. Berger calls for what amounts to child abuse, and Breiner’s… well, who knows what his problem is. If highlighting another ugly side of NARTH’s behavior helps wake people up to what kind of organization this is, then I have no problem with that.

“I do not agree that people wanting to live by their beliefs is evil.”

I think that this is a very shallow statement about ethics. It implies that all “beliefs” are of equal value or are equally good. If beliefs are evil (and some beliefs are evil), then a person who wants to live by their evil beliefs is also evil.

I don’t care if some “progressives” here think that my statements are not “nuanced” enough. The Nazis had evil beliefs and were evil people because they wanted to live by their beliefs. No, I am not saying that Christians are Nazis. I’m only giving the example that no one in their right mind would dispute.

The idea that gay men are disgusting and wicked is an evil idea, and the desire to do whatever it takes to “fix” them causes harm. It is evil. Period.

“No one is suggesting tarnishing the entire exgay movement as racist, just the part the expresses racism and the part that enables, promotes, and stands by them.”

I disagree. After my first post, Michael Bussee wrote the following:

“I agree that the movement lacks merit on many levels (both Biblical and scientific) but as long as leaders of the ex-gay movement remain SILENT on THIS issue, it is fair to assume that they hold the same views as NARTH.”

Michael is apparently willing to label every one of the “leaders of the ex-gay movement” as racist unless they specifically repudiate the beliefs of one ex-gay. I think that is unfair. I also think it is weak that we would have to resort to cheap accusations of “RACISM!!!” rather than continue to attack the ex-gay movement where it deserves to be attacked, and that is in the ways that it fails to live up to its promise, in the ways that it makes statements that are false and unscientific, and in the ways that it harms people. THAT is what this is about. This is NOT about racism!

Berger never offered a word of apology for his advice to “tease and ridicule” gender variant kids. He called his critics “busybodies”.

Schoenewolf keeps on defending his piece and insists that all his critics are examples of “Political Correctness gone amok”. Joseph Nicolosi seems to agree.

Alan Chambers has urged NARTh to “think long and hard about its mission” because “people’s hearts and even lives are at stake”. What does Alan Chambers have to gain by standing proudly alongside an organization that has “advisors” that even Alan says he would not tolerate on HIS own board?

Mr. Chambers needs to do what some of NARTH’s own have done, and what EXODUS founders have and many other SANE voices have urged– drop OUT.

If you, as a gay man, marched in a pride parade next to Harry Hay, who was carrying a sign that says “NAMBLA marches with me” then yes, you would be complicit. If Exodus shares a stage with NARTH before NARTH completely repudiates those of its membership who argue for racism and child bullying, then they are complicit. Those who embrace the stinky tend to get the stinky on themselves.

No one is suggesting tarnishing the entire exgay movement as racist, just the part the expresses racism and the part that enables, promotes, and stands by them.