Category: Warren Throckmorton

There are many problems still here but this statement represents some movement. The consensus for the Anti-Homosexuality Bill as written appears to be waning.

Position of ICRCU

Tuesday, 9th March, 2010

IRCU is an initiative that brings together different religious institutions to address issues of common concern.

Its membership comprises of the Roman Catholic Church in Uganda, the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council, the Church of Uganda, the Uganda Orthodox Church and the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

Vision: A divinely Peaceful, prosperous and HIV/AIDS free Uganda

We the Council of Presidents of the Inter-Religious Council of Uganda (IRCU) gathered this 10th day of February, 2010, at IRCU Secretariat;

Having read and considered carefully the provisions in the Anti-Homosexuality Bill yet to be debated by Parliament;

Aware of our mandate to nurture and protect the moral fibre of our society, guided by the Holy Scriptures of the religions we subscribe to;

Hereby state that:

1. The Bible, the Quran and other Holy Teachings treat homosexuality as a sin. Both the Bible and Qur’an are  categorical in their objection to same sex relationships (Lev. 18:22; Surah Ash’shura 26:165-166). Homosexual acts are contrary to the natural divine law, and under no circumstance can be approved.

2. The IRCU Council of Presidents, therefore, condemns homosexuality as an undesirable evil that should not be allowed in our society.

3. Our religious teachings promote respect, compassion and sensitivity. We, therefore, condemn the sin but welcome the sinners to confess, repent and seek a new beginning. This is based on the belief that all people are called by God to fulfill His will in their lives; IRCU, therefore, decries the proposed death penalty and life imprisonment in the proposed Bill as unwarranted. We believe homo-sexuals need conversion, repentance, support, and understanding and love in order to abandon their practices and return to God fully.

4. Since the proposed death penalty and life imprisonment do not provide the sinner an opportunity to repent, hence falling short of compassion to those who need conversion, repentance, support and hope, they are unnecessary.

5. Even the proposal to prosecute those who fail to disclose information regarding homosexual acts is inconsistent with the trust, confidentiality and professional ethics of persons such as parents, priests, counselors, teachers, doctors and leaders, to whom the sick, troubled and repentant sinners turn in search of support and advice for rehabilitation. The proposed law does not provide for the rehabilitation of repentant homosexuals. Yet as Religious Leaders, we are mandated to reach out to all people of God in a show of love and compassion (Mt. 9:10-13). The proposed Bill also has the potential to destroy the family as it is likely to undermine the important role of parents in providing guidance to their children.

6. Additionally, in our view the proposed Bill may not be called for considering that acts of sodomy are already condemned under section 145 of the Penal Code. However, we recognize the need to improve on the Penal Code as it has gaps which can be addressed by some provisions contained in the proposed Bill.

7. We the Council of Presidents of the Inter – Religious Council of Uganda, therefore, advise government, and all well-meaning groups and individuals to take remedial measures against this evil that has crept into our society by:

a. Exposing the people and organizations funding homosexuality in the country;

b. Providing enough information on recruitment and funding to the public in the interest of transparency and accountability;

c. Establishing facts on homosexuality and gay activities in Uganda and publishing a brochure which IRCU can distribute through its structures;

d. Emphasizing our core cultural and religious values and undertaking moral education in schools; and

e. Counteracting the distortion and misrepresentation of the debate on homosexuality by the media.

SIGNED:

His Eminence Metropolitan Jonah Lwanga: Archbishop of the Uganda Orthodox Church; Chairperson, IRCU Council of Presidents

His Grace the Most Rev. Henry Luke Orombi: Archbishop of the Church of the Province of Uganda/Member IRCU Council of Presidents

Pr. Dr. John Kakembo

President, Seventh-day Adventist Uganda; Union/ Member IRCU Council of Presidents

His Eminence Sheikh Shaban R. Mubaje: Mufti of Uganda/ Member IRCU Council of Presidents

His Grace Dr. Cyprian Kizito Lwanga

Archbishop of Kampala Archdiocese/

Member IRCU Council of Presidents

ABC News Nightline went to Uganda and filmed Martin Ssempa showing porn in church and then got Scott Lively on camera. Here it is:

As I noted yesterday, Peter LaBarbera of American for Truth About Homosexuality doesn’t like the sexual identity therapy framework, saying

As you can see above, Throckmorton’s and Regent University’s Mark Yarhouse’s “Sexual Identity Therapy” model grants the possibility that some clients may come to embrace a positive “gay identity” that “modifies” their religious beliefs in such a way as to “allow integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity.”

If he is consistent, he will need to expand his crusade to include an organization and therapist he often cites approvingly. On the AFTAH website, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality is referenced at least 46 times (e.g., here). However, on the NARTH website, co-founder of NARTH, Joe Nicolosi says that gay affirming counseling should be available.

The developmental model we suggest must deeply resonate with the men we work with, or they will (rightfully) leave our office and pursue a different therapeutic approach. We explain that our position differs from the American Psychological Association, which sees homosexuality and heterosexuality as equivalent, and along the way, we encourage them to clarify and re-clarify the direction of their identity commitment. Gay-affirmative therapy should, of course, be available for any such client.

A few gay-identified clients do decide to stay with us. Out of respect for diversity and autonomy, I affirm them in their right to define themselves as they wish, and I accept them in their gay self-label.

Nicolosi affirms these clients in “their right to define themselves as they wish,” and he accepts “them in their gay self-label.” Of course, here Nicolosi is speaking as a professional therapist and as such acknowledges that such affirmations come from a respect for autonomy. There is little difference between these options and the options LaBarbera criticizes in his article on the SITF.

There are many problems with LaBarbera’s recent crusade. One, highlighted by this post, is that his critiques of the SITF are devoid of any proper context. The SITF is intended for mental health professionals and professional relationships with clients of all ideologies. Pastors and ministry workers follow a more directive line in keeping with the teachings of their faith. Will NARTH now become a target since they support acceptance of some clients “in their gay self-label” and affirmation of “them in their right to define themselves as they wish?”

UPDATE 2: Is NARTH the next target for Peter LaBarbera? Since NARTH’s website also allows for client self-determination regarding goals and objectives, they are the next logical target. Also, Dr. Nicolosi, co-founder of NARTH does not discourage homosexual behavior in his clients.

UPDATE: Jim Brown at ONN published a follow up article to the one which is the subject of this post.

Dr. Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College says he has not lost faith in God’s ability to change people who are struggling with homosexuality, but believes most of those people are not likely to experience a “diminishment” in same-sex attraction.

“To say that because it appears from the research that change is infrequent in attractions doesn’t mean I’ve lost my faith in God’s ability to change people,” he states.

…………………………

In an article from OneNewsNow this morning, Peter LaBarbera says that I have lost my “faith in God’s ability to change people.”

Strange that no one asked me what I thought about this. OneNewsNow did not ask me what I think of change. LaBarbera paraphrases something I did not say and they printed it. If you were doing an article about someone, wouldn’t you make an effort to get that person’s views? (UPDATE: I am glad to report that OneNewsNow reporter Jim Brown just called and did seek my perspective)

Regular readers of the blog will understand the difference between the change and congruence paradigms of sexual identity ministry. The change paradigm seeks change of orientation as a goal and a standard of success. Some who hold to this paradigm believe that such change is an indicator of spiritual growth and what is known in Christian theology as “sanctification” – i.e., becoming holy and without sin.

On the other hand, the congruence paradigm seeks alignment with one’s understanding of Christian teaching. Change in the direction of essential attractions is viewed as infrequent and may actually be better describe as better behavioral control. A smaller subset of those people may change their attractions in a more dramatic and abrupt manner. This latter experience may be more common among women than men. Whether it happens or not is not deemed important to the objective of congruence. An assumption is that essential human desires are not likely to change much in this life and so the objective is to align behavior and will to Christian teachings.

The congruence paradigm defines change in ideological terms with meaningful cognitive and behavioral implications. Being converted to Christianity or experiencing a recommitment to one’s faith is a profound change and from the perspective of my Christian tradition is the most important kind of change.

So this accusation that I have lost my “faith in God’s ability to change people” is flat wrong. It also ignores the body of my work and efforts to bring evangelical concerns to the professions. I have been working to make the professional bodies aware that religious identity is powerful and for many evangelicals so vital that it overwhelms all other considerations. The chair of the recent American Psychological Association task force on sexual orientation acknowledged this in an interview with the Wall Street Journal:

“We’re not trying to encourage people to become ‘ex-gay,'” said Judith Glassgold, who chaired the APA’s task force on the issue. “But we have to acknowledge that, for some people, religious identity is such an important part of their lives, it may transcend everything else.”

Earlier today I posted a more detailed rebuttal to attacks on the sexual identity therapy framework. Co-author Mark Yarhouse also posted today on the same subject.

Tonight, Nightline is covering Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill. The preview is an article on the ABC News website, extensively quoting Martin Ssempa and Scott Lively.

First a catchy way to begin a news story:

Standing onstage in black velvet robes, despite the stifling heat in the open-air church, Pastor Martin Ssempa’s face is a mask of disgust.

“Anal licking!,” he shouts, directing the crowd’s attention to the images of hardcore gay pornography that he’s projecting via his laptop. “That is what they are doing in the privacy of their bedrooms.”

“Everything having to do with eating of poop…heterosexuals do not eat poop,” Ssempa said. “And if they do, they are misguided, they are not real heterosexuals. We don’t practice, that’s an abomination. It’s like sex with a dog, sex with a cow; it’s evil.”

Wow, where do you go from there? The story then weaves material from Ssempa, Scott Lively and Val Kalende, a Uganda lesbian.

The bill was introduced several months after a visit by several American evangelicals, who spoke at a conference called the “Seminar on Exposing the Homosexual Agenda.”

One of them was Scott Lively, a pastor from Temecula, Calif., who believes that countries like Uganda can still protect themselves from what he sees as the scourge of the gay agenda.

“These are good Christians; better Christians than there are here in the states,” says Lively. “They care about each other. And I think the reason they’re pushing so hard on this law is that they don’t want to see what happened to our country happen over there.”

He told the conference’s audience, made up of teachers, social workers, and politicians that “even though the majority of homosexuals are not oriented towards young people, there’s a significant number who are. And when they see a child from a broken home, it’s like they have a flashing neon sign over their head.”

Lively, who is the president of Defend the Family, is also the author of a book called “The Pink Swastika”, which argues that the Nazi Party was a homosexual movement.

Then David Bahati tries the same line he has used before: the bill doesn’t say what it says.

The bill also calls for seven years in prison for “attempt to commit homosexuality,” five years for landlords who knowingly house gays, three years for anyone, including parents, who fail to hand gay children over to the police within 24 hours and the extradition of gay Ugandans living abroad.

The bill’s sponsor, David Bahati, now insists the death penalty only applies to homosexual pedophiles.

“The whole thing has been distorted, ” he said. “And we know that some copies of the bill have been circulated on the Internet, which are incorrect.”

Bahati defends the bill’s stringency. “Well it can sound tough to some people but it’s acceptable to our community here. Remember that here in Uganda, 95 percent of our population does not support homosexuality.”

If anyone from ABC News is reading, please put the Uganda Gazette copy of the bill on your website. Here it is. This is the official copy. I asked Parliamentary research service staffer Charles Tuhaise if I had the official copy and he confirmed that I do. Tuhaise also confirmed that the bill is about more than punishing pedophiles when he said to me:

…you have read the Bill and know that its object is to outlaw all same-sex sexual conduct. The question of “consenting adults” therefore does not arise. All same-sex sexual conduct is proscribed under the Bill.

Can’t get much clearer than that.

Where is the situation now? ABC News is reporting that the bill will be debated later this month.

But the outrage in the West may mean the bill gets watered down or even killed. The Ugandan parliament will hold hearings on it later this month.

As for Lively, he says if they drop the death penalty, he’ll actually endorse it. Whether the bill passes or not, the culture wars – both at home and abroad – promise to continue raging on.

According to a source in the Parliament, the bill has not been reviewed by committees and is not scheduled for any action at this point. That could change of course, but clearly the bill has been slowed down.