His reason for retraction had nothing to do with the veracity of the study. Further the only thing he stated regarding the study was "the critiques [of my study] are largely correct" and "The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it, but nothing more."
I suspect he was simply sick and tired of getting harassed, (RE: retraction: "So I don't have to worry about it anymore"), by the butt rangers and their useful idiots.
-from the article
"In retrospect, I have to admit I think the critiques [of my study] are largely correct," Dr. Spitzer told the American Prospect in an article by Gabriel Arana titled, My So Called Ex-Gay Life. "The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it, but nothing more." Spitzer asked for a retraction of his 2001 study, "So I don't have to worry about it anymore?"
In summary The arguments remain -homosexuality is an intrinsic disorder and homosexual sex is self destructive, of no benefit to society, and noting to be promoted -I am not drinking the leftist koolaid you are serving up.
That was exactly what I got from that.
I don’t know or care about his original study, but it doesn’t sound like he went back to the drawing board with his quiver of scientific method tools and came to a different conclusion.
It sounds more like he wants to wash his hands of it. Can’t say I blame him.
“The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it”
Mostly, what they say about it, as I understand it, is that it works for them.
Spitzer now says ex-gay testimony is only evidence for what ex-gays think about their condition, and nothing more.
Ok, fine.
So pro-homosexual testimony, like “I was born this way”, “I can’t change”, etc.....is that not just evidence for what pro-homosexuals think about their condition, and nothing more?