Exodus International to take over Day of Truth

Exodus International will take over the “Day of Truth” in 2009. This news release was jointly provided by Alliance Defense Fund and Exodus.

Day of Truth to be spearheaded by Exodus International
The Alliance Defense Fund is transitioning its leadership of the Day of Truth initiative to Exodus International.
Day of Truth was launched four years ago in response to GLSEN’s (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) “Day of Silence” national initiative. “Day of Silence,” established in 1996 and aggressively placed in public schools throughout the U.S., asks students to take a nine-hour “vow of silence” to protest what they describe as “discrimination and harassment” against student’s engaged in homosexual behavior.
In 2004, when a student in Poway, California openly objected to this overt promotion of a practice that he found morally offensive, he was punished and silenced by the school administration for expressing his views. The school’s actions prompted the Alliance Defense Fund to legally defend this young man’s rights and, in turn, to launch a national response to the GLSEN’S Day of Silence. That response was the Day of Truth.
Designed to give students an opportunity to openly voice their views on (and objections to) the Day of Silence, the Day of Truth has grown from a handful of students to over 13,000 participants in all 50 states standing for the Truth. As the movement has grown, the focus has continued to broaden…providing students not only with legal assistance when their free speech rights are challenged, but also providing them with information on how to minister and witness to individuals struggling with homosexual behavior.
It’s because of growth in this latter area that this transition is occurring. For more than thirty years, Exodus International has provided thoughtful care to individuals wishing to leave homosexuality and offered support for related families, friends and churches. With 230 member organizations, the Exodus network is mobilizing the body of Christ to minister grace and truth to a world impacted by homosexuality…perfectly positioning them to lead the Day of Truth into the future.
ADF will continue to serve as the legal support arm for this project and represent any student who is silenced or punished for speaking the Truth.
When is the Day of Truth?
This year’s Day of Truth will be Monday, April 20, 2009. To view a video and participate this year, visit www.DayofTruth.org and register. Even if you have registered with us in the past, please register again this year. This allows us to track the number of participants every year. (It’s free to sign up!) You may also order products and materials, download free resources, and learn more about the project. On the Day of Truth, participating students wear their Day of Truth t-shirt and hand out “Truth cards” which simply explain that it’s time for “an honest discussion about homosexuality.”
Please do not hesitate to contact us with questions, for resources, or to share your ideas. You can reach us at [email protected] or 1-800-TELL-ADF.

The Day of Silence is April 17, 2009. I continue to oppose boycotts and confrontations and instead will support the Golden Rule Pledge.
The Day of Truth has in the past focused on change of sexual orientation as being a prime message for schools. I will be interested to see what Exodus changes about this event.

37 thoughts on “Exodus International to take over Day of Truth”

  1. LOL. And it’s a good thing I didn’t ask you about repentance in a public forum…just as you have your take on why Joe or others in Exodus don’t answer plainly and quickly, it would appear that you’ve purposely avoided the question because it either makes you uncomfortable or you know very little about it. I’m not saying that’s so…just demonstrating how very easy it is to read motives and then have other people blindly accept your interpretation.
    I’ve said it before: We’ve got enough issues to contend with here without the addition of our personal spin to the facts.

  2. Michael–
    There you go again. I’m sure you felt that Bob’s question re how Gary might have acquired AIDS offended you. But just like I was sure he didn’t use the word ‘slut’; I’m also pretty sure that he didn’t mock your relationship. He asked a question that you felt mocked your relationship. The question was simply a question. If he did in fact mock your relationship, please provide the words and I’ll confront him myself on his attitude. But, if he did nothing more than the conversation you quoted in another thread, please be warned that I will continue to dog you for the slant that you are adding to the truth.
    And if I introduced myself as an ex-Pennsylvanian (I still have friends and family there and I visit EVERY year) not one person would say I’m a ‘From Pennsylvanian’. It’s what it means but they don’t say it that way. Your point is lost on me. Stretching but never reaching.
    LOL. It occurred to me on the bus ride home that you’d likely ‘respond’ to me but that you would totally ignore the issue of repentance. It was in my first paragraph of the post you responded to. Please tell me where (if anywhere) repentance fits in your theology. You seemed to be accusing us of the heresy of works vs grace; I’m thinking that might simply be because you don’t understand repentance as we do. In any event, your charge of heresy makes me think you do owe me an answer on this one. Always willing to be REAL with you!

  3. Michael,
    Why is it so important to you – what we call ourselves? I honestly don’t think your motives here are for the poor, poor people who you think we are all trying to trick with evasive language – since we have all described ourselves in public. We have all taken steps at length to define what ex gay means to us and yet you have refused ALL definitions except the one you want. Your motivations must be with what YOU want for yourself to convince yourself of something – but not really for others. Else you would have given up this chase posts and threads ago.
    Everyone has explained several times in numerous posts that ex gay can mean a variety of experiences. As Carole pointed out in a well thought out post, coming up with something more is just not going to work. Everyone has taken the time to help you understand that leaving gay behind means leaving gay behind. We have all made that decision.
    For you to demand that we have not left gay behind is like you telling us that we can never leave. Persoanlly, I don’t want to be gay or identified in that social or sexual group. I am not gay and living in denial, or struggling against my “natural” being, or doing what you say most ex gay people do. I am ex gay.
    I really do feel for you. It is painfully obvious that you are in pain and struggle still with decisions you have made throughout your life. We all do. I struggle today with decisions I made decades ago and still grieve. Yet, they have nothing to do with gay or ex gay. So we are all human and have losses and decisions that have hurt ourselves the lives of others. But I cannot go back and convince myself or someone else that I did the right thing. Could this be what is happening for you?

  4. Eddy: I did NOT say that Bob Davies called Gary a “slut”. I said he strongly implied it, mocking our relationship. His comments were mean-spirited and out of line.
    Regarding Joe Dallas “hemming and hawing” about having both “temptations”, I can show you the tape of our joint appearance on TV where Joan Rivers directly asked Joe about his attractions, and he repilied (after having to be asked more than once): “I make it a point not to talk about my private life” — even though he had agreed to present the “ex-gay” side on national TV! Joan Rivers even brought out Joe’s printed testimony! Joe was frustrated and embarassed, then exaplained “we all have BOTH [attractions]”.– even though that is clearly not ture.
    Joe wne ton to say that the “change” he was talking about was NOT a change “from one end of the spectrum [gay] to the other [straight} — asserting tht all people are bisexual in their attractions and that “ex-gays” having simply moved down the line a little. That’s not “ex” and in “no longer”. That’s bisexual — and Joe’s own testimony shows that he has had bisexual attractions all of his adult life.
    I do “congratulate him for a job well done”. He did speak plainly enough to please even me. How come EXODUS is not consistently and freely up front about such things? How come they hide behind the hype and Christianese? Why “vex” and “provoke” the media? When you used those words, you gave it away.
    “Ex-gay” is intended to be puzzling and unclear so that the media will give EXODUS the attention it wants.
    Why do they have to be pressured to be honest by antogonists like me? Why not just say, “In terms of my attractions, they are still toward men, not women. In that sense, I am still gay”? Why not say, “My gay attractions are weaker and I choose not to act on them?”
    I seriously doubt that if you ask someone on the street, “what does ex-gay mean” that you will find one person, excluding yourself, who will say, “Oh, that’s a FROM gay!”. Come on Eddy. Get real.

  5. Michael–
    Where does the biblical notion of repentance fit into your theology? I’ve got it in there alongside grace. (Just my way of pointing out that your ‘me-grace, you-works’ was a touch lacking in it’s theological scope.)
    Love your ‘from’ ridicule. I’m an ex-Pennsylvanian and it doesn’t sound silly at all to say I’m “from Pennsylvania”. Well, would you look at that?! “From” is both supported in the dictionary and in common usage as a meaning for ‘ex’.
    Can you supply us all with your definitive guidelines on when we depend on a dictionary and when we reject it? So far, it sounds like we depend on them when they support your point of view and reject them when they defend ours? Is it really as simple as that?
    As to the Joe Dallas story, I’m going to have to see if I can find it for myself. You recently accused Bob Davies of calling Gary a ‘slut’ but then it turns out that he only wondered if Gary had had sex outside of your marriage. So, when you use words like ‘hem and haw’, I simply don’t trust them to be free from a Michael-twist. I have no doubts that Joe Dallas said what he said; I’m just hesitant about the Michael words that lead into it. I know you’ve made it sound that I only admitted to homosexual temptations ‘when cornered’ when, in fact, I majored on teaching ‘The Reality of Temptation’.
    What you interepreted as ‘hemming and hawing’ could have been Joe trying to figure out whether to speak it from his own experience or to speak it in a more general sense. It could have been Joe taking a moment to survey the crowd and trying to sift out words that wouldn’t communicate clearly. Let’s congratulate him for a job well done. He evidently spoke plainly enough to please even you. So, perhaps instead of ‘hemming and hawing’, it was a ‘thoughtful pause’.

  6. Mary: Wrong again! I am not calling you bisexual. I am using the dictionary definition of the term. Here it is. Notice that it says NOTHING about actual behavior and NOTHING about whether or not one “enjoys” having the desires.
    1. sexually attracted to both men and women
    2. showing characteristics of both sexes
    Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006

    Gay is being attracted to only the same sex. Straight is being attracted to only the opposite sex. Bisexuality is being attracted to BOTH. If you don’t like that, take it up with those who compile standard English dictionaries –= and with everyday speakers of the English language. Don’t blame me. I didn’t invent the terms. A stop sign still means “stop” even if you choose for it to mean “go”!
    Unlike “ex-gays” I use the standard, commonly excepted, dictionary definitions. You insist on using words in you OWN way, meaning what YOU want them to mean. It is the classic Humpty Dumpty dilemna: http://sundials.org/about/humpty.htm
    Like Humpty Dumpty, it seems that words mean whatever YOU prefer them to mean. It’s one of the biggest problems I have with “ex-gays”. And I think it is deliberately deceptive — an attempt to cover up the truth that “ex-gays” are not straight — no matter what they prefer to call themselves. What you choose to call yourself doesn’t change facts. You can choose to call an “elephant” and “eggplant” — but that doesn’t make it one. Same goes for choosing to call yourself “ex-gay”.
    Joe Dallas, then head of EXODUS, was once pressured during a radio interview to explain what “ex-gay” meant. After a lot of hemming and hawing, he finally came clean. Here is what he said: “It [the term “-ex-gay”] is more of a convenience rather than saying a Christian with homosexual tendencies who would rather not have those tendencies. It’s just rolls of the tongue easier.”
    Notice that Mr. Dallas refers to still having but not wanting the “tendencies” — the feelings, the attractions, the temptations. According to his own printed testimony of “change”, he still has BOTH. Alan Chambers admits having BOTH. That makes them bisexual in orientation according to any standard English dictionary, not straight — whether or not they “enjoy” the feelings or ever act on them.
    Eddy insists that “ex-gay” only means “from gay” — as in having a gay background
    But George Bush is not our “from president”. My former spouse is not my “from wife”. The guy who dumped you for another girl is not your “from boyfriend”.
    “From” may be one of the possible definitions of the prefix “ex” but it is not t the most commonly understood or used one. Except for “ex-gays”, “ex” means “no loner” something. And since “ex-gays” still have exclusively or mainly gay attractions, it is misleading to keep using the term to give the impression that they are no longer gay.,

  7. Michael,
    I need only to refer to your many posts. You have spoken for yourself.
    What is your life is clear to you. Calling someone else bisexual when they have clearyly said that they do not define themselves that way is like me calling you bisexual.

  8. Mary, I don’t know why you seem to have such a hard time with it. I am just making clear that I have never said many of the things you accused me of, that ex-gays are not heterosexual and that they should be honest about that. What don’t you get?
    Eddy, the theologiocal point that I am trying to make is that we are saved by grace, not by the absence of “continuing sin”. We ALL sin, everyday and if salvation depends on not sinning anymore we are ALL in BIG trouble!

  9. Agreed! You and Exodus have very different theological perspectives when it comes to homosexuality. You find their position offensive as they do yours.
    Re masturbation and fantasy: Exodus exists to fill a support gap that just isn’t available to them in their church. But every pastor and church counselor ought to be able to talk about masturbation and fantasy, having had personal experience with it, and any guidance they may have.

  10. @ Eddy: You agreed that ” They (EXODUS) also believe that continuing in sin puts you in risk of Hell. They don’t major on that but it does come up; it’s pretty much central to their motivation. Concern for the eternal life that I presume most of us believe in. Different philosophies, approaches, focuses but those beliefs at the bottom line. I’m actually surprised that the subject of Hell comes up so infrequently.”
    So am I Eddy. So am I! I guess talk of eternal torment is kinda off-putting. But it is actually the “great divide” on this issue. EXODUS sees any continuing gay behavior as something that “puts you at risk for Hell”. (By the way, would this include even masturbation? Fantasies? Or just actual contact with another person? EXODUS has never been clear on that point.)
    The point is, EXODUS, as the world’s largest “ex-gay” organization, believes that this is a salvation issue — and they will pick and choose New and Old Testament passages to “‘prove” it.
    You see, I believe that we are saved by grace. I believe that once we are HIs, no one (including us) and no thing (includind “SSA”) will ever be able to separate us from the love that is in Christ Jesus. I may be His wandering child or His sincerely mistaken child — but I am forever His child. Not due to any righteousness on my part, but because He chose me. I consider any theology that makes salvation dependent or our actions or our holiness to be heresy.

  11. Mary: Once again you are wrong!!! Simply having sex with a woman did not make me “bisexual”. What you don’t seem to comprehend is that there is a HUGE difference between sexual behavior and sexual orientation.
    This is very personal, but I suppose it is necessary to clear up your confusion: I did not have sexual feelings with my wife. I had to think about men in order to “perform”. I would only be bisexual if I had persistent sexual attraction to both genders. Is a life-long lesbian “bisexual” if she has had sex one or more times with a man? NOPE! Just another lesbian who has had sex with a man.
    Sexual orientation is about the prevailing direction of one’s automatic, persistent emotional/sexual/romantic desires — or “attractions” — or “temptations” as EXODUS likes to call them. I have never been “tempted” on a “chemical” or physical level to have sex with a woman.
    The fact that I could perform does not in any way make me straight or bisexual. It only means I was trying to be “straight” by having straight sex. Behavior is external. Orientation is internal. Behavior is very changeable. Orientation, it seems, is not.
    So once again, for the record: I do not want “ex-gays” to “go away”. I would not be happy if they all died. I do not think that my path is the only path to happiness. I do not possess absolute knowledge. I do not think ex-gays are stupid or malevolent. I do not think that ex-gays” should not have the right to live their lives in accordance with their values.
    I do not think that everyone with “SSA” should necessarily act on these feelings. (That is an individual choice.) I do not advocate that people with “SSA” should lead any particular “gay lifestyle”. I certainly do not advocate that anyone engage in a meaningless string of unsafe sexual encounters.
    So please STOP suggesting or asserting that I believe otherwise. The only things I would like “ex-gays” to do are: Be completely honest about what has “changed” and what has not. Don’t give the impression that you are “straight” or heterosexual when you are not
    Consider dumping the term “ex-gay” altogether — as even the head of EXODUS has suggested. Instead, try using words that are easily understood by everyday English-speakers. Drop the “hype”, “spin” and “Christianese”. Avoid terms that deliberately “vex” or “provoke” the media. Live any way you want — just be honest about it.

  12. Michael and Jayhuck are absolutely right. EXODUS does firmly believe that homosexual behavior is a sin. I would guess that most, if not all, believe in Heaven and Hell. They also believe that continuing in sin puts you in risk of Hell. They don’t major on that but it does come up; it’s pretty much central to their motivation. Concern for the eternal life that I presume most of us believe in. Different philosophies, approaches, focuses but those beliefs at the bottom line. I’m actually surprised that the subject of Hell comes up so infrequently.

  13. Jayhuck,
    Many ex gay people are not ALL ex gay people – or do we have to go over this lesson one more time with you?
    Just as some gay people are not ALL gay people.

  14. Because I can’t take my own advice – LOL 🙂
    Mary – I’m not saying now nor have I ever said in the past that the exgay of today is EXACTLY the same as the exgay of yesterday – BUT as Michael has shared, and as other recent exgays have shared, they, the past and recent exgays, seem to have more in common than you suggest. Many exgays still preach that gay people are going to hell, and inappropriate, disruptive and unethical therapy still abounds.
    Warrens therapy, that is not Reparative in nature, seems to be one of the best when it comes to helping people who feel that cannot live as an active gay person – albeit not the ONLY one.
    Being gay is not a disease and needs no cure!

  15. Jayhuck,
    Why the double standard?
    BTW, just read the stories of those who remain ex gay. Those who remain ex gay are very different than in Michael’s day. Obviously something is different otherwise different paths would not have been marched.

  16. Warren,
    Thank you for acknowledging that just because a man is married to a woman, that does not make him straight, at least in the conventional sense. 🙂

  17. Michael – trust me on this one, its best to just let it be with Mary!!!! 🙂
    Mary – for the record, ex-gays today still have alot in common with, as you say, the ex-gays of Michael’s day – look at the stories we have at BeyondExGay, from RECENT survivors of ex-gay therapy!

  18. Maqry: You must really think me a monster! Why on earth would you sy something like: ‘Only upon our death will you be saitsfied Michael that lives change.
    Once again — and I have said this now many times over — I do believe thqt “lives change”, I just do not believe that gays become heterosexual. Maybe they do, but I have never met one. Maybe BidgFoot and the Loch Ness Monster exist, too, but I have never seen them.
    And I certainly do not want anyone to die. Where do you get this stuff? You say that nowadays, ex-gays do not prech that unrepentant gays will go to Hell. You are misinformed. Alan Chambers calls homosexuality “evil” and EXODUS still uses the Bible top put out that “they that do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” You keep talking about big changes in the ex-gay movement when in reality very little has changed.
    And you are also mistaken that I “continue to call anything that is not totally straight – gay.” NOPE. I call it bisexuality.

  19. Warren wrote: ….they rarely become entirely heterosexual. I do think there is movement with some of those who claim it. And I believe that the spousosexual phenomenon occurs where men gain attractions for their spouses but almost no other women. That is not straight like most straight men are straight but it is a change that is from something to something else.

    How would you counsel a woman who came to you and said she was thinking of marrying such a man. On the one hand she’d never have to worry about his eye wandering to another woman. But can you give her statistics on such unions as to their lastibility?

  20. Only upon our death will you be saitsfied Michael that lives change. I feel sorry for the man who is living a 29 year lie. But your example here and there is not enough. Darlene Bogle also went around telling people that they would end up in hell for being gay. Not a good example of change – in my view. She seems to have changed that opinion. Had she known that years ago and approached her sexuality from other than at the point of a gun, she might have experienced a different change – rather than a false compliance. Sadly, she was confused, misguided by well meaning people, not once but now twice. She, your nor I are going to hell anymore quickly or assuredly than anyone else on this planet – christian or not.
    Ex gays today are different than those who claimed (at the threat of hell/death) what change means. And our theology is not the same as was yours in your day. I have never believed that gay people are going to hell for being gay. Actively, passively, in their mind etc… So just from the get go … there is a big dfifference in motivation which can alter a route from the beginning.
    We do not all have to walk in the straight world with fear of going gay. Or stuggle everyday against gay feelings, or living a lie. We can tell it like it is. You just don’t like to hear it. Wives married to ex gay men may not like to hear it, repressed church goers may not like to hear it, potential husbands may not like to hear it …. and especially gays don’t want to hear it….. Akin to covering your ears while trilling to avoid any sound that says, we are not lving the way you want us to.
    You continue to call anything that is not totally straight – gay. That is mismangement of sexual studies and you know it.

  21. @Michael Bussee said: In any event, the fact that men with “SSA” sometimes have satisgactory “straight” marriages does not mean that they are straight .
    Didn’t say it does mean that. In fact, I said basically what you say here but qualify it by saying that they become something other than exclusively gay which is not to say straight.

  22. @Warren: You said: “ they (ex-gays) rarely become entirely heterosexual..” So, rarely they do? Do you have any good, reliable evidence of a complete change in orientation from exclusively homosexual in attraction to exclusively heterosexual?
    Shortly after Gary and I came out, we told our stories at a church conference of some sort. I mentioned to the audience that I had never met a person who made such a complete change, but that I would very much like to talk with such a person.
    Afterwards, a woman took me aside and said “you’ve just met such a complete change. My name is Darlene Bogle”. This is the same Darlene who joined me years later to issue a joint apology for the harm we both may have caused in preaching the ex-gay line. She admitted that her claim of “complete change” was more a “statement of faith” than a description of her true, internal reality. And so it is with every ex-gay I have met.
    Bottom line, they are not heterosexual in the classic sense of that word. Some predominately gay men (like me) develop “spousosexual” feelings or attachment to one special woman. I did! Lots of gays do — for a variety of reasons. Some (like me) genuinely loved our wives and prayed that the straight feelings would develop by walking a faith road. They didn’t. I still am a person of faith, but I am not straight..
    Some were already bisexual to being with. Some want a family and manage to find a women who is a good match. Some “hide-out” in straight marriages. Some are happy. Some are not. I recently re-connected with a man to came to EXIT/EXODUS over 30 years ago. He tells me that for 29 years of marriage he has been “living a lie”.
    Others, like Alan Chambers, seem to be genuinely happy. This is nothing new — and is certainly no good evidence that “gays can change” — meaning a true change in orientation. Gays have been marrying heterosexually for as long as there has been marriage, i would guess.
    In any event, the fact that men with “SSA” sometimes have satisgactory “straight” marriages does not mean that they are straight . Have they experienced a change of some sort? Maybe not. Maybe yes. But not from homosexual to hetersexual.

  23. Neither do we stay like you have. And men and women are different on this issue. And I would not in anyway consider myself gay. I am not attracted to women anymore in that manner. Could it happen…? Maybe… but niether you nor I know that. Nor am I attracted to men the way your are, nor as some women in this society are attracted to men. I don’t have e generalized attraction to any guy. That is straight – but not the same as those who have always been straight.

  24. @Michael Bussee:
    The only thing I would say a little differently is that they rarely become entirely heterosexual. I do think there is movement with some of those who claim it. And I believe that the spousosexual phenomenon occurs where men gain attractions for their spouses but almost no other women. That is not straight like most straight men are straight but it is a change that is from something to something else.

  25. Mary: With all due respect, I am not saying that “gays cannot change” or “should not change”. Gays, like all people, , have every right to live their lives in accordance with their values — including the choice not to act on the gay feelings — if that is their choice. . I, at least, am not saying gays cannot change. I am saying they don’t become heterosexual.
    I am also not saying that they should not change. They should change in any way that makes them happy — as long as it does not deprive others of the same right. i am not “:berating” ex-gays. I am just asking them to be completely honest about what “change” is and is not.

  26. My views on this issue have changed some over the years. GLSEN’s early track record was not good regarding how they interacted with kids in schools. However, they have cleaned things up quite a bit. From their perspective, reparative therapy is a political movement more than a scientific one. And there is truth in that assessment. On the other hand, there are religiously motivated people and others for other reasons who simply do not believe a gay identity fits the rest of their identity. These people seek a different resolution. When either side denies the reality of the other, it promotes a desire to protect and defend the denied view. DOS supporters would do well to affirm the side they disagree with and DOT people would do well to rethink the entire thing, imo.

  27. Exodus is also debating whether homosexuality is inborn over at Opposing views, see:
    What gets me is Exodus will argue that homosexuality is not genetic – “Science Doesn’t Support the “Gay Gene” Theory” – as a way of saying it isn’t inborn. Then Exodus goes off and argues that “Your Gene Pool Doesn’t Have to Define and Dictate Your Life” and “DNA doesn’t act alone.” Talk about contradictions.
    And Alan talks about the point that ‘all of creation is fallen/broken.’ Please…. if they add in the ‘daddy issues’ theory even the kids on the playground are going to kill in the debate that any DOTers make.
    Honestly, though… kids in school shouldn’t be dealing with this at all. Not the DOS or the DOT. We adults politicize the schoolroom way too much.

  28. I sat in class tonight, thinking to myself, what about the silent ex gays. Those who are told they cannot change, should not change and are chastised in public for speaking about change. Berating people like myself will only make voices like mine get louder.
    We do not have to live acting out any same sex attraction with other human beings, we do not have to deny ourselves the right to couple with a person of the opposite gender, and we do have the outspoken right to request that a psychologist be as unbiased to our needs as he or she is to a black person or gay person. And that means policy approval that does not cater to a gays only or a gay life and living prescription is best for everyone. As we all know policy in the pyscho/social/sexual medical industry have changed over time. Just because we are living in a time that is pro-gay and anti- ex gay does not mean that those policies are correct or fixed.
    Granted, I don;t like the way EXODUS is run or their stance that everyone should deny their same sex attraction. I don;t like children wearing shirts to school that say FAGS ARE PERVERTS and then quoting the scripture as if that is really how it reads or is translated. But by the same token, neither do I think ex gays should be silenced nor those who are questioning should be kept from the TRUTH that people do change.
    I support the Golden Rule not DOS or DOT. Both of those are misleading and corrupt with political energy.

  29. Ditto everything Jayhuck said. I find it ironic that EXODUS is sponsoring a “Day of Truth” when they can’t even be completely honest about what “change” and “freedom from homosexuality” really mean.

  30. Eddy,
    I know individual “ex-gays” like yourself who seem to be very good people who support equal rights for gays, but you cannot fault gay people for criticizing the exgay industry which has been at the FOREFRONT of turning people’s attitudes against gay people and working VERY hard to undermine equal rights for them.
    If and only when Exodus gets out of politics entirely can they challenge that message.
    Besides – what is said in the above statement is absolutely TRUE – if we indeed want to talk about TRUTH! No mainstream organization from the American Medical Association, to the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, and on and on support reparative therapy.

  31. I have very mixed feelings about Exodus being so centrally involved in the DOT and hope that they do indeed stick to the truth. Their involvement in this will likely be held up for scrutiny.
    I do see, however, why they feel the need to be involved. I read GLSEN’s basic promo piece for the DOS and found an open and accepting tone throughout until:

    Some critics of the Day of Silence come from the perspective of “reparative” or “conversion” therapy and/or from the perspective of “transformational ministries.” It is important to note that “reparative therapy” has been rejected by all the major health and mental health professions. Additionally, the view of “transformational ministry” adherents is not representative of the views of all people of faith. Finally, the Day of Silence is about unacceptable behavior (anti-LGBT bullying, harassment, and name-calling in schools) not debates about beliefs.

    So, on one level, while the Day of Silence makes no statement, the above statement that announces it does. Always, always, always take a jab at the ‘ex-gays’. Support everyone regardless of their orientation or leaning—well, except those who aren’t at peace, for whatever the reason, with their homosexuality.
    In the entire piece, no bully profile was offered and the only paragraph that mentioned any objecting groups was the one I quoted. The not-so-subtle underlying message seems to be that those who believe in change are the bullies. I’m all for Exodus challenging that message!

  32. Is the DOT going to be any different this year than in the past just because Exodus is overseeing it? It upsets me that Exodus sets itself up like this to oppose what is supposed to be bringing awareness to the bullying of gay and lesbian kids.
    I live in a town of about 100,000 people, and we have no Day of Truth in any of our schools although we do honor the Day of Silence. It is my understanding that the supporters of DOT are only a TINY fraction of the supporters of DOS – THIS makes me happy 🙂

Comments are closed.