Programs to change gays to straights don't work, report says

[MCWAY]

If Christine Sneeringer's experiences was representative of all lesbians then there might be something to that.  But it isn't.  Not even close.  Exodus, it seems, wants a person to suppress homosexuality in the name of God.  Some people are religious enough to do that even though it may mean a life of misery. 

What ever makes them happy.  Although they are probably not very happy. 

I beg to differ. People who go to Exodus do so on a voluntary basis, meaning that they are NOT happy with homosexuality. In other words, they're not gay with being gay.
 
A crackhead is happy when he gets a hit. Going through rehab causes misery.

It's not about success or failure.  The point is, homosexuality still exists in the person.  They are only suppressing it.  And its that suppression that often causes other problems talked about in the report.

That's like saying lust or infidelity "still exists". Therefore anyone attempting to curb their straying habits are simply "suppresing" them.

Also, Adultery, lying, and or theft have direct victims.  What 2 consenting adults do in the privacy of their home with in reason doesn't.  So the only similarity they share is in the Bible in that they are sins.  In society they are like comparing apples to toe jam.

Hardly!! The direct victims are the people themselves. Harming yourself is just as sinful as harming someone else. And, more often than not, when one harms himself, it's only a matter of time before he harms others.

[MCWAY]

I have to say, even though some of you may have found this disrespectful, there is a certain amount of veracity in this post. As someone who went to 6 different  Catholic schools from kindergarten through high school graduation, it was hard to ignore the fact that there appeared to be a high concentration of gays among the vowed faculty at all of them. A lot of people I've met in my adulthood who attended Catholic schools share this observation. At the middle school I attended, almost all of the nuns were pretty obvious closet cases, with the exception of one who had left the habit and gotten married. At both of the high schools I attended, it was a similar story. The majority of priests were so flamboyantly gay that there was no question. There were some who appeared straight and probably were, but  even among unworldly high school students, it went pretty much uncontested that a lot of nuns and priests opted for a life of celibacy so they didn't have to deal with their sexuality.

Part of the reason for that is the Catholic church has a nasty habit of touting things that have no basis in Scripture (i.e. celibacy).

You’re right about the dealing with sexuality part. That’s why I brought up the Sneeringer example (which is hardly an exhaustive one). The folks at Exodus have noticed common issues among many of those they help, among them:

-   Lack of bonding with a same-sex parent
-   Physical/sexual abuse
In her case, she saw being feminine as being weak, thanks to watching her dad beat on her mom. Add some molestation from her male cousin and there you have it.

Gospel Singer and minister, Donnie McClurcken, outlines that in his testimony and book. He struggled with homosexuality, due largely to his being molested by his uncle as a boy.

Yet another example would be Stephen Bennett. While living with his male lover, someone witnessed to him and shared the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That someone would later become his wife (and the mother of his two children).

[MCWAY]

It is worth noting, however, that Bennett's stance is quite different from that of Chambers.

Stephen Bennett, an ex-gay himself now for 15 years, happily married for 14 years to his wife Irene and the father of their two children, stated, "Frankly, I am shocked that the President of the largest information and referral ministry in the world on homosexual issues, would ever make such irresponsible and false public statements. If Mr. Chambers, a married man and father, who once engaged in homosexuality himself, says he's never met 'a former ex-gay' or one who has 'changed completely', he's personally invited to our home in Connecticut to meet one. I'd also be happy to introduce him to numerous other individuals - all former homosexual men and women."


Bennett once engaged in the homosexual lifestyle for 11 years with over 100 men - losing partners and friends to HIV/AIDS, until everything changed in 1990 - when he was confronted with the gospel of Jesus Christ. He dealt with his root issues and in 1992 completely changed. Stephen no longer struggles whatsoever with homosexual temptation.

"Homosexuality is an outward expression of an inward conflict. When I completely dealt with my inward conflict, my alcoholism, cocaine addiction, bulimia AND homosexual struggle were completely gone," said Bennett…..

Stephen continued, "What we see here is the public divide of the pro-family movement. One camp believes 'dialoguing' with homosexual advocates and activists will bring about a happy middle ground and compromise for all. That, I'm afraid, will NEVER happen. You see, 'compromise' is not in God's dictionary -- and of course homosexual activists are loathe to compromise on their core beliefs.  The other pro-family camp biblically believes homosexuality is, was and always be a sinful lifestyle that individuals were not born with, yet a lifestyle they CAN experience COMPLETE freedom from. I am in that camp. I don't believe in encouraging a dysfunctional, dangerous and potentially deadly lifestyle, but COMPLETE liberation from it."
 
Bennett ended, "Let the chips fall where they may. It's time the world knows where those in the pro-family movement stand. It was Jesus Christ alone who set me free from the sin of homosexuality - not an ex-gay group, not reparative therapy and not any psychologist. I was made whole by the Word of God and the blood of Jesus Christ shed for me on Calvary, and I will proclaim and offer that same hope, freedom, grace, truth and reality to all who seek it until the day that I die. I pray my brother Alan Chambers will grasp that same message.
 
"For I am NOT ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ [Romans 1:16], for it was Jesus Christ alone who saved me, delivered me and set me COMPLETELY free from my sinful homosexual past."

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/944023451.html

[OzmO]

I beg to differ. People who go to Exodus do so on a voluntary basis, meaning that they are NOT happy with homosexuality. In other words, they're not gay with being gay.

Many that go to drug/alcohol rehab go voluntarily too.  that's not what I was talking about there.  I was pointing out that her experiences that occurred prior to her embracing her lesbianism are not near typical of lesbians.  Many probably go to exodus under pressure from their families because they are told they are spiritually sick and guilted into it, they will burn in hell, they are dis pleasing jesus, etc...

A crackhead is happy when he gets a hit. Going through rehap causes misery.

And the study shows the same thing with gays and some cases very very bad.

That's like saying lust or infidelity "still exists". Therefore anyone attempting to curb their straying habits are simply "suppresing" them.

Lust and infidelity are far different than homosexuality in that sense.  Lust always exists but does not cause problems unless you act on it if you are married.  Infidelity is a choice to break a marriage vow.  Homosexuality is how you partner up on a personal/emotional level.

Hardly!! The direct victims are the people themselves. Harming yourself is just as sinful as harming someone else. And, more often than not, when one harms himself, it's only a matter of time before he harms others.

You are not harming yourself if you have a homosexual relationship.  So you think Gays are actively harming people?

[Hereford]

Many that go to drug/alcohol rehab go voluntarily too.  that's not what I was talking about there.  I was pointing out that her experiences that occurred prior to her embracing her lesbianism are not near typical of lesbians.  Many probably go to exodus under pressure from their families because they are told they are spiritually sick and guilted into it, they will burn in hell, they are dis pleasing jesus, etc...

And the study shows the same thing with gays and some cases very very bad.

Lust and infidelity are far different than homosexuality in that sense.  Lust always exists but does not cause problems unless you act on it if you are married.  Infidelity is a choice to break a marriage vow.  Homosexuality is how you partner up on a personal/emotional level.

You are not harming yourself if you have a homosexual relationship.  So you think Gays are actively harming people?

Every time you make out with your boyfriend OzmO, Jesus crys.   

[Fury]

It is worth noting, however, that Bennett's stance is quite different from that of Chambers.

Stephen Bennett, an ex-gay himself now for 15 years, happily married for 14 years to his wife Irene and the father of their two children, stated, "Frankly, I am shocked that the President of the largest information and referral ministry in the world on homosexual issues, would ever make such irresponsible and false public statements. If Mr. Chambers, a married man and father, who once engaged in homosexuality himself, says he's never met 'a former ex-gay' or one who has 'changed completely', he's personally invited to our home in Connecticut to meet one. I'd also be happy to introduce him to numerous other individuals - all former homosexual men and women."


Bennett once engaged in the homosexual lifestyle for 11 years with over 100 men - losing partners and friends to HIV/AIDS, until everything changed in 1990 - when he was confronted with the gospel of Jesus Christ. He dealt with his root issues and in 1992 completely changed. Stephen no longer struggles whatsoever with homosexual temptation.

"Homosexuality is an outward expression of an inward conflict. When I completely dealt with my inward conflict, my alcoholism, cocaine addiction, bulimia AND homosexual struggle were completely gone," said Bennett…..

Stephen continued, "What we see here is the public divide of the pro-family movement. One camp believes 'dialoguing' with homosexual advocates and activists will bring about a happy middle ground and compromise for all. That, I'm afraid, will NEVER happen. You see, 'compromise' is not in God's dictionary -- and of course homosexual activists are loathe to compromise on their core beliefs.  The other pro-family camp biblically believes homosexuality is, was and always be a sinful lifestyle that individuals were not born with, yet a lifestyle they CAN experience COMPLETE freedom from. I am in that camp. I don't believe in encouraging a dysfunctional, dangerous and potentially deadly lifestyle, but COMPLETE liberation from it."
 
Bennett ended, "Let the chips fall where they may. It's time the world knows where those in the pro-family movement stand. It was Jesus Christ alone who set me free from the sin of homosexuality - not an ex-gay group, not reparative therapy and not any psychologist. I was made whole by the Word of God and the blood of Jesus Christ shed for me on Calvary, and I will proclaim and offer that same hope, freedom, grace, truth and reality to all who seek it until the day that I die. I pray my brother Alan Chambers will grasp that same message.
 
"For I am NOT ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ [Romans 1:16], for it was Jesus Christ alone who saved me, delivered me and set me COMPLETELY free from my sinful homosexual past."

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/944023451.html

"Confronted with the gospel of Jesus Christ." HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA. What a crock of shit.

[MCWAY]

"Confronted with the gospel of Jesus Christ." HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA. What a crock of shit.

Hardly!! As stated earlier, the woman who started witnessing to him (while he was living in homosexuality with his male lover) eventually became his wife of over 15 years, Irene.

[MCWAY]

Many that go to drug/alcohol rehab go voluntarily too.  that's not what I was talking about there.  I was pointing out that her experiences that occurred prior to her embracing her lesbianism are not near typical of lesbians.  Many probably go to exodus under pressure from their families because they are told they are spiritually sick and guilted into it, they will burn in hell, they are dis pleasing jesus, etc...

They are typical enough, as Sneeriger's case is hardly an isolated one. In fact, in many case of male homosexuality, there are also instances of molestation during childhood (i.e. Donnie McClurken).

Guilt doesn't motivate one to stay in such a program for any sustained period of time, at least the amount of time it takes to be successful. And, as stated earlier, those who have left the homosexual lifestyle once thought that they couldn't.

And the study shows the same thing with gays and some cases very very bad.

So you ditch the rehab and go back on the pipe, as it were? That doesn't make sense.

Lust and infidelity are far different than homosexuality in that sense.  Lust always exists but does not cause problems unless you act on it if you are married.  Infidelity is a choice to break a marriage vow.  Homosexuality is how you partner up on a personal/emotional level.

And those personal/emotional levels are often based on environmental factors. Would Christine Sneeringer engaged in lesbianism, had she not been in an environment with domestic/sexual abuse?

You are not harming yourself if you have a homosexual relationship.  So you think Gays are actively harming people?

Those who've been in one would beg to differ, namely the likes of Sneeringer, Bennett, Chambers, etc. As for your question, I would say "Yes", based on the life stories of the aforementioned people and others like them.

[OzmO]

They are typical enough, as Sneeriger's case is hardly an isolated one. In fact, in many case of male homosexuality, there are also instances of molestation during childhood (i.e. Donnie McClurken).

So that's how you think people become gay?  Those are some ways but as i said earlier, not typical of how it happens.

Guilt doesn't motivate one to stay in such a program for any sustained period of time, at least the amount of time it takes to be successful. And, as stated earlier, those who have left the homosexual lifestyle once thought that they couldn't.

Guilt gets them in, helps them stay in.

So you ditch the rehab and go back on the pipe, as it were? That doesn't make sense.

That's not what i am saying.  I am saying that the process of drug rehab is stressful and  can have negative consequences which is what the study here is saying about trying to change gays to straight.

And those personal/emotional levels are often based on environmental factors. Would Christine Sneeringer engaged in lesbianism, had she not been in an environment with domestic/sexual abuse?

Sometimes it takes traumatic events for people to learn who they are.  It's impossible to say whether would have or not.  A case can be made for both results.

Those who've been in one would beg to differ, namely the likes of Sneeringer, Bennett, Chambers, etc. As for your question, I would say "Yes", based on the life stories of the aforementioned people and others like them.

That's because of religious and social norms.  Those people need to get over themselves.

[24KT]

Personally, I don't think people are born with a natural aversion to homosexuality. I think it is a taught taboo.
One that developed in ancient times simply for pragmatic reasons. Rulers of kingdoms wanted and needed large populations to maintain and expand their wealth & influence... that meant reproduction ...pure & simple.

Where is BayGBM in this conversation?

[Soul Crusher]

Personally, I don't think people are born with a natural aversion to homosexuality. I think it is a taught taboo.
One that developed in ancient times simply for pragmatic reasons. Rulers of kingdoms wanted and needed large populations to maintain and expand their wealth & influence... that meant reproduction ...pure & simple.

Where is BayGBM in this conversation?

Personally, I have met both.  I have met men who choose to be gay, and men who seem born that way.

Why are we even disussing this? 

[OzmO]

Personally, I have met both.  I have met men who choose to be gay, and men who seem born that way.

Why are we even disussing this? 

Because parts of the debate on "gay rights" centers around the idea that people chose to be gay or are born gay. 

[Soul Crusher]

Because parts of the debate on "gay rights" centers around the idea that people chose to be gay or are born gay. 

Who cares? 

As long as they dont want to pick my pocket or shove their agenda down my throat (No pun intended  ), its none of our business.   

[OzmO]

Who cares? 

As long as they dont want to pick my pocket or shove their agenda down my throat (No pun intended  ), its none of our business.   

Enough people to put propositions on ballots, march and protest. 

[MCWAY]

Enough people to put propositions on ballots, march and protest. 

Case in point: The "People's Veto" in Maine, later this year to reverse the gay "marriage" bill, passed in that state.

Last year's Amendment 102 in Arizona, as well as Florida's Amendment 2


And, of course, who can forget Calfornia's Proposition 8, from last year.

[OzmO]

Case in point: The "People's Veto" in Maine, later this year to reverse the gay "marriage" bill, passed in that state.

Last year's Amendment 102 in Arizona, as well as Florida's Amendment 2


And, of course, who can forget Calfornia's Proposition 8, from last year.

Case in point at the moment.

The fact that they even made propositions and amendments is significant.  It would have never happened even 10 years ago.  Mark my words, In your lifetime you'll see these things 100% passed.

[MCWAY]

Case in point at the moment.

The fact that they even made propositions and amendments is significant.  It would have never happened even 10 years ago.  Mark my words, In your lifetime you'll see these things 100% passed.

The marriage amendments or the gay "marriage" bills?

So far, we have 30 states that have, via amendments, clearly defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.  Unless the Supreme Court gets involved, I don't see that changing. And, the last time I checked, gay activists are leary of a Supreme Court case happening right now. The rationale is that, even with Sotomayor now in the court, they feel that it's still too "far to the right". That is, they feel there are at least 5 justices against them. And a loss there means another gay "marriage" case make take DECADES.

The last one done was in 1972. And the Supreme Court didn't even rule on that directly. It simply dismissed the appeal of a state court ruling on its merits, which effectively means, "we don't need to look at it, because the lower court ruled almost exactly the way we would have".

[OzmO]

The marriage amendments or the gay "marriage" bills?

So far, we have 30 states that have, via amendments, clearly defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.  Unless the Supreme Court gets involved, I don't see that changing. And, the last time I checked, gay activists are leary of a Supreme Court case happening right now. The rationale is that, even with Sotomayor now in the court, they feel that it's still too "far to the right". That is, they feel there are at least 5 justices against them. And a loss there means another gay "marriage" case make take DECADES.

The last one done was in 1972. And the Supreme Court didn't even rule on that directly. It simply dismissed the appeal of a state court ruling on its merits, which effectively means, "we don't need to look at it, because the lower court ruled almost exactly the way we would have".

You'll be living for a few more decades. 

[MCWAY]

You'll be living for a few more decades. 

I certainly hope so.

But, with regards to the marriage issue, once again it boils down to who's in office and the makeup of the courts.

One group that certainly doesn't think that gay "marriage" nationwide is a lock is the gay activists in California. They've had to pull the plug on their plan to put an amendment on the state ballot to kill Prop. 8. Word is that they don't have nearly enough signatures to put it on the 2010 ballot. So, they're going to wait until 2012, at least.

[timfogarty]

Word is that they don't have nearly enough signatures to put it on the 2010 ballot. So, they're going to wait until 2012, at least.

come on, getting enough signatures to qualify for the ballot is trivial.   the issue is voter turnout during a non-presidential election, and how much money will be required to fight this again. 

[MCWAY]

come on, getting enough signatures to qualify for the ballot is trivial.   the issue is voter turnout during a non-presidential election, and how much money will be required to fight this again. 

No, it's not trivial. If the gay "marriage" supporters had the signatures, not only would they have submitted them by now, they would use their gleaning of those signatures in a relatively short period of time as a indicator of support for their cause.

That exactly what happened in Maine, regarding traditional marriage supporters. In just one month, the folks there got over 100,000 signatures (nearly double the require amount) to vote on using the "People's Veto" to reverse Maine's gay "marriage" bill.

Back to California, I believe it took over 2 years for the Prop. 8 guys to get the signatures needed to put the measure on the ballot. So, I found it a bit silly for the gay activists to think that they could match that in just a few months. As for the money, the "No on Prop. 8" contingent spend over $43 million in a losing effort, as opposed to the $40 million spent by their opponents.

You're right about the voter turnout thing, which is why some of the younger gay activists there were banking on 2010. Their rationale is that there won't be as many Latinos and especially Blacks (the demographic credited/blamed for putting Prop. 8 over the top), since Obama isn't on the card. While that may be true to a point, the problem is that they're won't be nearly as many younger voters, the demographic about whom gay activists brag are their biggest supporters on this issue.

[Dos Equis]

I just learned that a lesbian girl I know met a man who cured her.     She is leaving the lesbian lifestyle choice behind and talking marriage with a man.  Love, marriage, and baby carriage.    

[Al Doggity]

I just learned that a lesbian girl I know met a man who cured her.     She is leaving the lesbian lifestyle choice behind and talking marriage with a man.  Love, marriage, and baby carriage.    

He "cured"  a lifestyle choice? That's an odd choice of words.

[Dos Equis]

He "cured"  a lifestyle choice? That's an odd choice of words.

Tongue in cheek.  Just another example of someone choosing to become a lesbian and now shunning girls for a man. 

[Al Doggity]

Tongue in cheek.  Just another example of someone choosing to become a lesbian and now shunning girls for a man. 

She is most likely bisexual. When this relationship falls apart, she be back to carpetmunching.