Posted on 08/25/2006 2:56:54 AM PDT by FairOpinion
NEW ORLEANS (BP)—Approximately 50 people from various pro-family groups protested the American Psychological Association’s convention Aug. 11, opposing the organization’s position that says homosexuality cannot be changed.
“The fact of the matter is that there are tens of thousands of men and women just like me who have overcome homosexuality. ... We’re living proof,” Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, a ministry to homosexuals and ex-homosexuals, told Baptist Press. He took part in the protest in New Orleans.
APA has been one of the leading organizations to back the claims of homosexual activists. A statement on its website says that homosexuality “does not require treatment and is not changeable.” In addition, the statement says that “close scrutiny” of conversion therapies “cast doubt on their claims” that people have been freed from homosexuality. APA even has a Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual Concerns office.
“The American Psychological Association is concerned about such therapies and their potential harm to patients,” the statement says.
But that statement also says clients have a “right to unbiased treatment and self-determination” — something that Chambers and others say is not the case when it comes to APA’s stance on homosexuality.
Caleb Price, research analyst at Focus on the Family, called APA’s position “hypocritical.” Price says he identified himself as a homosexual for about 14 years but now is a Christian and heterosexual.
“If they are about science and not about politics, then they should be willing to look at issues involving homosexuality … in an intellectually honest way,” Price, who also took part in the protest, told BP.
APA’s position on homosexuality has given homosexual activists a significant boost in the national debate over such issues as homosexuality and “gay marriage.” The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest homosexual activist organization, lists APA’s position statements on its website, along with similar statements from the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association.
“I think the most harm that the APA is doing is they’re using their position to steer the debate in the media and in the public to cast doubt on the tens of thousands of men and women who have changed,” Chambers said. “That’s unfortunate and it’s unfair. But what the governing board of the APA is doing doesn’t resonate with the members of the APA.”
Chambers said the majority of the psychologists they came in contact with were “very supportive and very interested in what we were saying.”
“But as far at the governing board of the APA, they are the ones who don’t talk about a client’s right to self-determination,” Chambers said. “They basically say homosexuals can’t change and that’s the end of the story. That’s very different from what the psychologists within the movement say.”
Clinton Anderson, director of the APA’s Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual office, told the Associated Press that there “is simply no sufficiently scientifically sound evidence that sexual orientation can be changed.”
Price, though, strongly disagreed.
“The reality is that people’s lives are changed,” Price said. “We are living testimonies of the fact that people can and do change.”
Exodus International, Focus on the Family and other likeminded groups will protest APA’s meetings in the future, Chambers said.
“We hope to do these every single year until we reach our goal, which is to help the APA understand that they need to respect every client’s rights,” he said.
For information about the national debate over “gay marriage,” visit www.bpnews.net/samesexmarriage.
shrinks expect behavioral psychology to rule the day.
yet for this one behavior we are expected to just ignore behavioral psychology.
"Translation: "We went back into the closet." LOL"
I agree with you. I don't buy the idea that anyone can get rid of those sick tendencies. I don't think that sort of thing is a choice. They are just going back into the closet. I don't ever remember making a choice to be interested in women. I didn't sit down and way the pros and cons of being straight and of being a fruit. It just kinda happened that I ended up being straight.
I have found the best allegory to homosexuality is left and right-handedness. We all have a natural preference. If, however, while developing, one is taught or forced to use the "wrong hand" (as I was for batting in baseball....my brother told me I was doing it wrong and would make be bat right-handed) - THAT becomes the natural way. However, with just a little practice, one can recover the "natural" original preference. (I practiced a little and can now bat or golf both ways).
The same can be applied to sexuality. A naturally hetero peron can easily be drafted into "gayness" during their early years. Many of these folks can change - and be completely happy (I personally know 1 girl and 1 guy wwho have done so). The term "L.U.G." doesn't exist for no reason.
Now, that being said, there ARE many naturally gay people. To try to change them would be a failure and a mistake. But, I would bet there are more "made" gays than "natural" gays...although I have no statistics on the matter....just personal observation.
Apparently political correctness doesn't have to be logical for some to buy it...
You're right, it really isn't a choice. The problem is, you apparently don't understand the issues. According to therapists and ex-gays, same-sex attraction isn't a choice. It isn't a choice because when they're engaging in homosexual behavior they are confused about their sexuality.
Of course, engaging in homosexual behavior is always a choice. It's the attraction that isn't. I encourage you to read the links on this thread and get back to me.
Yeah, if I want to - bi-sexuality is just that.
People can do anything they wish, behaviorally speaking.
But there's no scientific evidence that naturally gay people exist.
That is, there is no genetic test or procedure (experimental or otherwise) that can determine one's sexual orientation. When people claim to be gay and we believe them, what we're really doing is taking them at their word. We believe their claim, we believe their testimony and we believe their declaration that they are gay.
But there are some people who are suddenly skeptical when one claims to be ex-gay. They don't believe the ex-gay claim, they don't believe the ex-gay testimony nor their declaration that they are ex-gay.
When somebody uses a certain standard to measure the credibility of what one group says, but then refuses to use the same standard to measure the credibility of what another group says--thereby ignoring the claims of the second group (ex-gays)--he should ask himself why he believes one group and not the other... This is a double standard.
I would agree if they were born without the ability to reproduce (as a group - you can't debate being sterile is not a defect).
Which then would invite the arguement that they would have no sexual desires to begin with....
Of course it's not a choice. How many child molesters have ever been cured? Homos probably have about the same rate of cure.
We conservatives need to get a dose of reality. It would be great if child molesters, homos, and other deviates could be cured, but that's not going to happen.
That's an excellent point I often overlook. Of course we also have the Queer By Choice crowd as well...
Apparently some of us do.
It would be great if child molesters, homos, and other deviates could be cured, but that's not going to happen.
All you need is to get educated on the subject. And in this very thread are links that will help you get that education.
I'm an observer. Go to the Walter's Museum of PAthology. You will see humans that have been born with all sorts of "oddities" - to say the least.
To think that some males weren't born with extreme feminine desires or that females are born with essentially "male brains"...is to deny reality.
Most males have a varying degree of femininity (except Ted Nugent). And most females have some "maleness". Occasionally, these traits cross "some line" that tilts them toward the "wrong sex". It just is. I don't make the rules. God does. All I do is observe and report.
I think those that try and split the behavior into the BS of "naturally born" are in the same camp as those who teach the controversy when all else fails.
It is pure absurdity.
Naturally born a bank robber behavior?
Naturally born a chocolate eater?
Naturally born a snail eather?
Naturally born a silk sheet sleeper?
Naturally born a ford driver?
Naturally born a Chevy driver?
Naturally born a cat person?
Naturally born a dog person?
Homosexuals are just doing what they have been doing for the last 50 years, they are trying desperatly to desensitize the public to their deviant sexual behavior.
As you learn in psych 101, even children eventually learn that insects in your milk is a bad thing.
If you can show me how to completely get rid of my heterosexuality, I will consider the slim possibility that homos can be cured.
In other news, the Flat Earth Society claims that they have been deprogramming the masses since 1547.
Your points are generally why developmental biologists ridicule developmental psychologists. (some don't even consider psychology a real science. Its just where you store those smart enough not to get an education degree but not smart enough for a real science degree)
The whole female behavior male behavior spectrum is an absurdity when it comes to sexual behavior. Homosexuality is recreational sex. period. It does NOTHING for society.
All the other "fluff" is irrelevant to the furtherance of society. Those same shrinks would say an unemployed between jobs father who stays home while looking for a job is exhibiting "female behavior" while that woman is doing "male behavior". So getting a hair cut at a salon is female behavior but a barber shop is male behavior.
There make be arguments for a "spectrum" when it comes to normal humans. However no matter how you slice it, homosexuality is always an abnormal behavior just like sex with animals or some other screwy sexual fetish.
Anyone heterosexual that thinks homosexuals can really change should ask this question: Could I become a homosexual if I wanted to do it?
I believe you could get sexual with a guy if you found him somewhat attractive in a cute and non-threatening way. Perhaps if he was really cute and you liked him (maybe even a pretty she-male with long hair and breasts from taking female hormones or breast implants) and really wanted to work at it.
My point is everyone has an "erotic template". A list or collection of characterics they are attracted to sexually.
I think the ex-gay thing is simply choosing to fight these desires, rather than giving in to them.
Not so hard to believe. As a married man I am expected to avoid strip clubs and prostitutes and all the other sort of sexual temptation stuff. I don't see that avoiding gay sex by someone attracted to same sex partners is all that different. Resisting temptation is resisting temptation.
Now, should a single guy trust an ex-lesbian enough to marry her, or should a single woman marry an ex-gay man? That's a lot harder to say, because it really puts a lot of faith in the ex-gay partner being able to resist temptation for the rest of their married life. Probably best for an ex-gay to marry another ex-gay.
But I don't think it's right to make fun of people trying to change their lives for the better. Going back in the closet is still doing it and lying about it. Trying to avoid giving in to temptation and telling others it's possible is not going back in the closet and requires a lot of courage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.