Montel’s episode Homosexuality…Can it be cured? aired this morning.
I will be adding to this post through the day but I can offer a few reactions.
Reparative therapy was a term used repeatedly but never precisely. It stood for everything ever done in the name of sexual orientation change – from electroshock to exorcisms. In this way, the episode served to greatly confuse the issue. However, some of the cause for that confusion is the frequent inability of social conservatives to self-correct on matters homosexual. There are truly harmful things done in the name of reorientation and critics like Montel and his psychiatrist guest, Dr. Salzer, have found those who will talk about those problems.
Mike Jones, the man who outed Ted Haggard was the first guest and described again his reasons for exposing Mr. Haggard. He also noted that, after Mr. Haggard stepped down, Ted Haggard’s New Life Church treated him better than gay advocacy organization, the Human Rights Campaign. While an escort, Mr. Jones said his “clients” were 80% married men and 15% clergy.
Lance Carroll described his experiences in Love in Action, including a 10k price tag. Lance described being forced to go to LIA. Montel continually referred to LIA as reparative therapy. At one point, he said, “Let’s talk about being at the camp itself, because that’s really what the base root of reparative therapy is, to guilt you and sin you and try to make you disgusted with yourself?” Essentially Lance agreed with this characterization.
Alan Chambers was up next and described his story. He noted that he did not know why he was gay, and said to him, it did not matter if we ever learn genetics play a role. Montel was fine with Alan’s descriptions until he indicated that he believed the Bible did not allow homosexuality. At that point, Montel became animated and said that this point “kills me the most.”
Montel had confused Exodus as a ministry with a reparative therapy organization. However, Montel asked, “Do they counsel?” This led to a confusing interchange between Alan, Lance and Montel. Montel said that there are parents who because of the existence of ex-gay ministries believe, “I can fix my child.” Alan said, “But that’s not the case. For me this was a personal choice for me; you can’t fix your child.” Lance chimed in to say that he was in an Exodus ministry that did attempt to change him (Love in Action).
At about this point, Alicia Salzer was introduced. She is the psychiatrist who produced the video, Abomination: Homosexuality and the Ex-gay Movement which I have briefly reviewed on this blog. She made an outrageous statement in her opening remarks. She said, referring to Alan’s story, “This is marketing; this is not science…Science has shown us that 96% of people cannot change and along the way, absorb an enormous amount of self-loathing, a lot of confusion, a lot of family conflict, so I know the harm.” I intend to write the show to ask for the study or study that supports that public statement. Of course, there is no such study. I challenge her to produce it. Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time knows that I am quite realistic about prospects for change, but to say “science has shown us” anything authoritative on this matter is hubris.
She then goes on to describe her documentary as a description of those who have gone through reparative therapies. Again, she is imprecise with her terms and muddies the situation. I expect that from Montel as a layperson trying to make sense of the conflicting messages from the ex-gay world but I expect better from a psychiatrist.
One thing that surprised me was the way Richard Cohen represented himself. He described himself as a psychotherapist and is described on the Montel website as “a psychotherapist and practitioner of sexual reorientation therapy, or ‘reparative therapy.’” While this is probably how he sees what he does, he is unlicensed in Maryland and says he does coaching. However, he demonstrates what he calls bioenergetics, which is a therapy modality. He clearly does therapy, allows what he does to be labeled as such but does not have a license to conduct it. In Maryland, the counseling law is a title law which means he probably is within the law to say he does counseling, as long as he does not say he is a professional counselor or a licensed counselor. However, the psychotherapy designation may put him at odds with the Maryland psychology licensing law which requires licensing to do anything psychological.
The show ended with conflict between Montel, Alan and by the end of the show Arthur Goldberg of JONAH. Montel pulled some material from the Exodus website which he interpreted to mean Exodus was in the business of changing people. In fairness to both of them, I understand the confusion. Montel focused on the the objective of heterosexuality that was in the statement whereas I think Alan and many evangelicals do not see terms such as “liberation” or “freedom” from homosexual attraction as meaning that those attractions are gone. In various ways, Alan and Montel talked around each other, with Alan at one point indicating that perhaps the word “liberation” should come off of their website.
Peterson Toscano made an appearance and described his exorcisms. Again, this was in the context of the discussion on reparative therapy. I can imagine a viewer erroneously thinking everything described as being reparative therapy.
The show ended with Arthur Goldberg angrily shouting from the audience that the Bible doesn’t teach that homosexuals go to hell and that “abomination” in the Hebrew means “you have been led astray.” Now that’s an interesting take on things.
Now I come back to my first reaction — what was this show about? Was it about ministry to those who want to live by their faith as they understand it? Or was it about some kind of therapy to remediate homosexual attractions? The show never really separated the two and the guests were either unclear about this or the constraints of the show’s format made it difficult for them to articulate the differences. Richard did broach this subject at one point but it was never made clear. Perhaps, ex-gay ministries need to examine how confusing it is to mix therapeutic talk with ministry talk. I suspect Alan may wish Love in Action would make these distinctions and get out of the teen business and out of the live-in business. As an observer, I believe LIA may need a significant review and audit (do they really teach people how to sit?). If ministries and leaders do not more clearly identify questionable and potentially harmful practices and ideas, critics will continue to do so. At the same time, I also believe critics, such as Dr. Salzer, who should be able to make fine distinctions, should help the public see the distinctions, rather than confuse the issue with distorted and unwarranted claims about science.
Alan Chambers provides an inside look at today’s Montel show.
To quote the song from Hunchback: “God bless the outcasts, hungry from birth, show them the mercy they don’t find on Earth. God bless the outcasts, the poor and downtrod. I thought we all were the Children of God.”
Let’s hear EXODUS echo a similar sentiment by drafting and posting an anti-hate, anti-bullying, anti-discrimination, anti-violence policy on the front page of their website.
Alan asked me if I might like to write it. I am willing, but isn’t that his job — as the leader of EXODUS? Calling all EXODUS members and affiliates! Put some loving but firm pressure on Alan Chambers to get this done by 5/1/07. He wrote a book. Surely, he can do this. It’s 30 years past due.
Ann,
I was not being one sided, though I concede it may sound that way.
But I am unaware at present of any way that I am treating you badly (Regina Griggs’ claims, notwithstanding). So I just listed the ways in which the ex-gay movement is treating gays badly. I’m totally open to including the ways in which gays are harming the physical tangible lives of Christians, so lets assume that my post includes that as well.
But I am curious. Did you find ANYTHING on the list that resonated? Was there ANYTHING there that made you think, “hey, I would not want to be treated that way?”
In all the conversations I have with ex-gay ministries and ministers, I have yet to hear one single solitary example of an ex-gay saying, “yes, that’s true. I don’t want to be treated that way. I’ll speak out”.
None.
Zero.
I’ve heard some say, “I’m not political”. But no one will take a stand against the abuse by Exodus, FOTF, and the other leaders of the ex-gay movement. Most refuse to acknowlege that it’s harm because, well, honestly they cannot envision gay people as “people” or as their neighbor… only as the enemy.
Even those for whom I have some respect, such as Warren, are unwilling to say, “stop it. Treat people the way you want to be treated.”
And that, Ann, is why gay people don’t trust ex-gays or Christians. When it comes to Sunday morning there’s lots of “love your neighbor” but when it comes to reality, there isn’t much visible evident love. Not “tough love” but the kind of love that doesn’t include making my life more difficult.
This is something that can change. But you have to be willing.
yes, Michael, you are right! Also, hate crimes should not be singled out to any particular group
Does that mean that you will fight as hard to remove “religion” from hate crime laws as to remove “orientation”?
I’m sorry Timothy – I mean what does “salt and light†mean??
This was in reference to Karen’s post immediately above
Michael,
Please take this opportunity to participate in that which you endorse – please submit a statement for consideration and then you will know you have done your part to contribute to that which you strongly believe. There should be NO distinction between any kind of hate crime and I am glad to know that people can put this above any other differences they might have.
Hi Michael,
I always think of another thing after I post
Do you think it would be possible for the web sites that are “pro gay” to post a similar statement for those who do not share their beliefs? It would be a great foundation to come from when there is any disagreements in philosophies or when information is exchanged between people from all walks of life.
Karen,
BTW – Didn’t know if anyone on the blog realized this, but Mike Jones – whose integrity is clearly above reproach – has put his so-called “Ted Haggard Massage Table†up for auction on eBay. Even if the proceeds do go to charity, this is reprehensible.
It appears that you were the spearhead for an effort to get eBay to cancel this auction – which it now has done. Whether or not you were the actual cause, you did try very hard to get the auction cancelled.
I did not see the newspaper report of your efforts to raise funds to offset those that Angel Heart would receive (something in excess of $1,275). Was this an error on the part of the liberal media or did you not make the slightest effort to raise replacement funds?
From what I read in Matthew 21:41-45, I would not want to be guilty of taking food out of the mouths of the hungry.
Ann asked me to “please submit a statement for consideration and then you will know you have done your part to contribute to that which you strongly believe.”
I assure you, Ann, I am working with others on this very blog to submit a sample anti-hate statement to Alan for his consideration, as Alan asked me to do. As God is witness, I WILL do my part. I am not so sure about Alan Chambers.
I still don’t think I should have to do HIS work. Alan’s the current leader of EXODUS. I left long ago. It still seems to me that EXODUS (if it truly “loved the sinner but hated the sin”) would have posted its OWN anti-hate, anti-bullying, anti-discrimination, anti-violence policy statement decades ago. It should not have to be SHAMED into doing so.
Karen: Nice to meet you! I like your style.
You wondered what I meant when I differentiated between evangelical and just ‘regular’ Christians. I’m not sure I want to open that can of worms. Suffice it to say that a majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians while only a minority would identify themselves with the phrases “evangelical” or “born-again”. While both fall under the common label “Christians”, their approaches to daily life and its issues differ radically. Since the media has little grasp of the spiritual, it often fails to recognize these sharp distinctions both when it ask questions and when it hears the answers.
There have been some amazing comments–some even constructive–about ways to manage the miscommunications. Offhand, I’m recalling comments from you, Timothy, Warren and Jim B. that offer some hope. There were some comments contrasting therapy and ministry that were illuminating.
I notice that Michael has been lifting the provocative word ‘provocative’ out of one of my comments attempting to give it a nuance that I did not intend. I used it in the sense of “stimulating” or “vexing”…we wanted a term that would stimulate more questions; we wanted the media to be vexed so that they couldn’t just print some sleazy sound-bite. Michael’s renditions makes it sound like “inciting” and “irritating” were our motivations. You are all welcome to your opinions, I just thought I’d clarify what I meant when I said it. (That’s another thread and this one is already long enough!)
Michael, I also believe you should consider the suggestion of drafting the statement for Exodus. Alan could spend days or weeks drafting a statement only to find that he’s made some unfortunate word choice that stirs up a new furor. I hear what you said about it being his job and all but, on the other hand, it’s YOUR HEART. You’ve been riding Exodus for years about it and you’ve blogged about it pretty consistently, as well. So, you’ve got the heart and the writing talent…and now, you’ve even got the invitation. Won’t you at least consider it?
Hi Timothy,
It is getting increasingly more difficult for me to read your posts to me – they sound very accusatory, contemptuous, biased, selfish, assumptuous, and hypocritical. You espouse equal rights and treatment, yet , without knowing me at all you continue to confront me with an accusatory and contemptuous tone – why? Everything you say is important to me and I want to respond. I can only do that if you treat me as fairly as you want to be treated. Remember the golden rule you cited?
Ann… not that Tim needs any help with this, but anyway….
Would you have expected a black civil rights activist from the 60s to be of any less of the adjectives you just used to describe TIm (that is if you were a white, generally southern person of that time)? The point surely is this: Is Tim really those things or is it just your perception of a person who is speaking his mind about the problems he sees in society. Problems which you likely don’t even recognize and thus consider to be attacks upon your own view of what you consider an adequate society (at least for yourself).
Me, I understand Tim. I share the pain in my life from which his words and ideas spring. Religion if not the general cultue (I’m older) has been the cause of that pain for most of us. At least for me such pain is the definition of what makes a civil rights struggle. I don’t see the equivalence in the lives of non-gay religious persons in this issue.
So if what TIm says seems abrasive, that’s because it’s supposed to be. One cannot be in a civil rights struggle without making people, who would not allow you your rights or understand that struggle, squirm. Fairness for such persons is not then often a concern; when fairness is at the heart of the issue for us in the beginning.
Hi Ed, thanks for the clarification about “evangelical” and “regular” Christians. I had originally heard it as a more judgmental assessment.
I agree that by and large the media has difficulty making the distinctions there, too. I recently spoke with a local reporter over an issue that’s affecting me and my ministry. I trust him most because he isn’t satisfied with sound bites or snippets from internet blogs. His worldveiw is very different from mine, and his articles have also prominently featured statements from “the other side,” but he’s taken the time to get to know me and the ministry, he asks intelligent questions, and he probes until he understands. I appreciate that.
Ed Hurst said: “we wanted the media to be vexed” — vexed, provoked, whatever. I still maintain “ex-gay” is a misleading media trick, not straightforward, Christian HONESTY about what EXODUS can and cannot do.
The word “ex-gay” is deceptive and so are the tactics of “vexing” or “provoking” the media — instead of simply telling the truth. The term and the tactic are examples of exactly why EXODUS has such huge public relations problems. Can you really blame people for not trusting EXODUS in what they say or do?
Also, Ed says I should write EXODUS’s anti-hate policy because I have the “heart” for it. I’ll do it, Ed. But how sad is that? Why doesn’t EXODUS (and those who support EXODUS) have the “heart?”
Hi Lynn,
I’m not sure how to answer you because it seems as though you are making the same assumptions that Timothy has made about me. Thank you for writing and I think at this point I will become mostly an observer rather than a participant in the blogs.
Ann….. After re-reading Tim’s posts based in your own, I don’t get it. Tim is not speaking about you personally. He is speaking about those who would speak against gay folk in ways which derive from assumptions that are not truthful. In what other way can he speak? He has been quite honest with his answers.
It is neither TIm nor I who are making assumptions about you, Ann. It is rather you who appear to be placing yourself into that group to which we spake.
Ann,
I apologize if you were offended. It can be quite difficult to communicate in this format and often tones and attitudes can be assumed when they really weren’t present.
My writing (and speaking) style is very direct. I blame it on being a Sagitarious and having no tact
Again, if you were offended, it was not my intent.
However, I do hope that you review the answer I gave about how we treat each other. I sincerely hope that I am not complicit in any activity that impacts your life. And i hope that you reconsider any complicity you have in the efforts that ex-gay ministries regularly take to make my life more difficult.
And though I will not cease to challenge you to reconsider your presumtions where I think they are presented, I will, when addressing you in the future, attempt to phrase things in such a way as to soften any concerns that I may express so as to not make you feel personally threatened.
Timothy writes,
“It appears that you were the spearhead for an effort to get eBay to cancel this auction – which it now has done. Whether or not you were the actual cause, you did try very hard to get the auction cancelled.”
Yes, I registered my complaints about the auction with eBay and encouraged our ministry supporters to do the same if they were in agreement. A statement about the how and why of my action is on our ministry website, including my original memo to eBay. (Because of the “frames” format, you’ll have to click into the “Special Report” link and scroll down the page – http://www.transformingcong.org)
Jim Burroway suggests on his own blog and on the Ex-Gay Watch site that I did it because Mike Jones is a prostitute. That wasn’t my motivation. I did it because I believed Mr. Jones’ actions to be reprehensible, in other words “blameworthy.” It inflicted more pain and humiliation on Ted Haggard, his family and friends; it was an offense to the broader Christian community; it discredited the legitimate gay-rights cause; and it was a violation of eBay’s community standards to “treat others as you want to be treated.” One person I talked with said “You’re upset because it was in poor taste.” However, that understates our reaction. Mixing stripes and plaids is in poor taste. This went way beyond that, in my opinion.
But my Christian worldview has equipped me to be able to separate behavior from the essential person. The auction was sleazy; Mike’s action was and still is wrong. But nonetheless, in God’s eyes he is ESSENTIALLY a person of sacred worth. And that is how I choose to view him, too.
And now this whole thing is taking on a life of its own. Media outlets in Colorado are intent on turning it into a battle royal. One of them offered me airtime yesterday while Mike (with table) was in the studio to announce his re-listing. They seemed quite surprised when I declined. And completely oblivious to the “sleaze factor” of their program.
So defend the auction with “the ways justifies the means†all you like, and question my motives and character if you must, but I know in my heart that my opposition was a free speech act of conscience. I stand by it and will not comment further here.
Thank you very much Timothy for this note – it means a lot to me – everything you have ever written is important and my heart is with you much more than you know. Thanks again
I’ve decided that I want to issue a public apology to Mike Jones. (I’ve also contacted him personally as well.) I do it on this blog site because this is primarily where I have made comments about him. And I want to be as clear as I can about what I apologize for and why.
First a disclaimer: I am doing this as Karen Booth, personally, not as Karen Booth, Director of Transforming Congregations. I do not speak on behalf of the ministry. Second, I am not apologizing for protesting the auction to eBay – or encouraging others to do likewise. I’ve already stated my motives for that and I won’t rehash them again.
But I said in a previous post that God views Mike as a person of sacred worth and calls me to do the same. I do believe that, but some of my behavior and words have not lived up to it.
I shouldn’t have labeled Mike as a “gay prostitute†or “male prostitute.†Jim Burroway was correct to nail me on that. I shouldn’t have made disparaging remarks about Mike’s integrity or questioned his motives. That was an ad hominem attack that has no place in public discourse. And before I contacted eBay, I should have first contacted Mike with my concerns and appealed to him to end the auction. That would have been the Biblical – and healthy and loving – thing to do.
In all of the above, I have treated Mike very disrespectfully, as if he were a non-person. For that, I am deeply sorry and ask for his forgiveness.
Karen,
While we disagree on many things — including this auction — I cannot tell you how much my esteem for you has grown just now. That was a very generous and gracious apology to Mike.
Very well done. God bless you.
(I don’t know what happened… I know I posted a response, but now it’s missing. So I’ll try again)
Karen,
I cannot tell you how much my esteem for you has risen just now. That is a very generous apology. It was very courageous.
While we still disagree sharply on the auction itself, I’m very happy to see you take this courageous step.
God bless you.
Thank you Jim for your comments and for posting the link to Ex-Gay Watch. There are many folk on that blog and this asking questions – still about the auction and now also about my apology. Many of them are valid questions and I intend to try to answer those with as much transparency as possible. But I want to answer them all at one time, in one post, and after I’ve had time to reflect about it. And then I really want to move on from this.
So, ask away … and watch for my response maybe tomorrow or Monday.
Below are my answers to questions about my eBay auction protest and my public apology to Mike Jones. I’m only posting it here on this blog. Feel free to link to it, but please don’t just do snippets.
I’ll be out of town for the next three days and won’t have access to the Internet or my email. And I also do really want to move on from this.
Here goes …
1. Why did I issue an apology, and why publicly?
That’s what Christians do – or at least try to do. Not just apologize, but ask for forgiveness. And not just ask for forgiveness, but repent – meaning feel remorse and turn from the sinful behavior. I have a tendency sometimes to act like a grackle – one of those noisy blackbirds that puffs up and screams at the other birds. I sincerely want to model something different.
I apologized publicly because I think I owed that to Mike Jones. I scorned and belittled him publicly; I needed to deal with that publicly.
2. Wasn’t I just seeking media attention and notoriety for myself and the ministry I serve?
No. As other folk have posted, Transforming Congregations and I have been blindspots up to this point, not on anyone’s radar screen. And that’s been intentional. Not because we’re doing anything underhanded – who we are, what we stand for and what we do are all out there on our website and in our printed materials. But we don’t seek or desire media attention. I foolishly didn’t consider the eBay protest would be newsworthy. (And outside of Colorado and some ex-gay and gay blogs, it hasn’t been.) What I hoped would happen – that the massage table would just get out of the public eye – backfired. Chalk that up to my inexperience with the media.
Why am I “suddenly†appearing on the blogs? There’s an easy answer to that. I had a break in my travel schedule and have been home for a few weeks. I have time and the topics interested me. I’ve “lurked†on Dr. Throckmorton’s blog for a long time, but never had the nerve to post much before. That will probably change when travel picks up again in April.
3. What about Project Angel Heart?
I believe project Angel Heart and other similar organizations should be supported. I still don’t think Mike’s auction is the way to do it. I thought about bidding on the table myself, but my motivation wouldn’t have been for charitable purposes and I don’t have $1200 (the original high bid at time of cancellation) in disposable income. In contacting eBay, several of our ministry supporters indicated they would make donations to Project Angel Heart, but I don’t know if they followed through or not. That kind of ministry is not the focus of Transforming Congregations, so it wasn’t appropriate to make a donation from our supporter’s contributions.
4. Why didn’t I protest the re-listing?
As stated above, because my first protest didn’t accomplish what I’d hoped – to get the massage table out of the public eye. Some of the Colorado media indicated they would spin a re-listing protest into a personal battle between me and Mike. I won’t participate in that. Though I acknowledge that I have treated Mike disrespectfully, my beef was with the auction itself and with eBay, not with him.
Will I personally boycott eBay as I threatened to do? How does that old saying go? The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. Especially around Christmas time.
5. Aren’t I just a mean old ex-lesbian?
I’m truly taken aback by the depth of anger and hatred that has driven some people’s responses to me and my actions. The overwhelming majority of vile emails came from men connected to another blog site (not Ex-Gay Watch.) Most surprising of all (because I thought it was a stereotype) was their utter contempt for women, especially lesbians. I’m also sorry folk have painted all evangelicals or all Christians with the same broad brush stroke because of my personal transgressions. That kind of generalization, labeling and name-calling really troubles me – even though I sometimes do it myself.
I can’t begin to understand all the “whys†and “hows†of it, though discussion on Dr. Throckmorton’s blog has helped. But I imagine part of the intensity is due to continued fallout from the Haggard affair – aftershocks from his sin, his lies and duplicity. I deplore his actions. But my heart still breaks for the man, his family, and all the other lives that have been harmed by what he did. And while my heart also breaks for Mike Jones, I also deplore his actions – both then and now. To me, they are far from heroic.
In another post, Timothy expressed sadness over the fact that we might not achieve common understanding. The reality is, I don’t think we ever will. Our worldviews are incompatible. (And I used to be on the “pro-gay†side, so I know this firsthand.) The other reality is, within public and Church spheres we will probably be adversaries. Obviously, I don’t always live up to Jesus’ command to “love your enemies.†I will personally try to do better in the future, and you all have my permission to call me on it if I am disrespectful again. But many of the questioners are still asking me to defend my ministry, and that I will not do. I believe it’s loving; some of you don’t. We’re not going to find common ground on that, either.
6. Finally, regarding my picture, my looks, and my sexual preferences … really guys, I absolutely DO NOT wear Birkenstocks! Never have. Never will.
In the spirit of further understanding and respect … Karen
“Thinking I’m a moron gives people something to feel smug about. Why should I disillusion them?” — Charles Wallace in A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle
Karen — you gave me a good, old-fashioned belly laugh with this one: ” I have a tendency sometimes to act like a grackle – one of those noisy blackbirds that puffs up and screams at the other birds.”
Wow. You could have been describing me! I have to admit that I have definite unwanted GLT — “grackle-like tendencies”. Like you, I also sincerely want to model something different. Thanks again for the big smile. Hope you have a great day.
In another post, Timothy expressed sadness over the fact that we might not achieve common understanding. The reality is, I don’t think we ever will. Our worldviews are incompatible. (And I used to be on the “pro-gay†side, so I know this firsthand.) The other reality is, within public and Church spheres we will probably be adversaries.
Yes, it is sad that you have assigned my as your enemy. And I know that your worldview does not allow for any reconsideration of your predetermined views so there’s nothing I or anyone can say. I’ll just pray.
Thanks Karen for detailing your thoughts in that way.
David,
Given the way English is normally used, if you mention three different groups or people together, say that they are all wrong about something, and don’t specify further, it does imply that they agree. Still, I’m relieved to see that this was nothing more than sloppy use of language on Mike’s part.