Research? What research? All that NARTH has been doing since its conception is being a secular mouth piece for religious conservatives. They’re not in the business to do research. For them, the research must fit their conclusion, instead of the conclusion fitting the research (i.e scientific method), and so they select research that supports their view that ‘reperative therapy’ is a viable treatment and turn a blind eye on research stating otherwise. Now only is this not science, it is also fraud.

BeckySue, I suggest you learn about the scientific method, before writing out of your league.

“Actually, my post was addressing young people getting help.”

If by that you mean help to mould their putatively plastic brains into a supposedly heterosexual shape, who exactly is to decide that they need such help? Do they, or does someone else? And if it is they who do, is it a decision for them to make entirely of their own free will, without anyone else influencing them, or is it acceptable for them to make that “decision” as a result of peer pressure to conform to the heterosexual norm (à la Day of “Truth”), or as a result of what some might call moral pressure (but what I would call immoral bullying)? I’m interested to know.

There are four people that I know fairly well in the UK who have gone through “ex-gay ministry” programmes. All have remained homosexual. One of them went public in the media about being ex-gay, but I later discovered that he was continuing to have gay sex on the quiet.

So yes, my own experience is limited. However, I have followed the history of the “ex-gay” movement, and the facts, I think, speak for themselves. “Ex-gay” ministries tend to come and go. Many of the American ones that started up in the seventies and eighties are now defunct. Of those still operative, very few are still run by the “ex-gays” who originally founded and ran them. Why is this? In some cases the original founders/directors have admitted that the “ex-gay” quest is futile; in others they have been exposed as living double lives, claiming to be “healed” of their homosexuality while still secretly engaging in homosexual acts – sometimes with the clients of their ministries.

The picture here in the UK is similar. The director of True Freedom Trust has admitted that an actual change in sexual orientation is unlikely. The Courage Trust changed direction and became a pro-gay Christian organization after its director, Jeremy Marks admitted that after fourteen years of striving, he had failed to change his own sexual orientation; that “none of the people we’ve counselled have converted no matter how much effort and prayer they’ve put into it”; and that he had ceased to be a believer in the “ex-gay” process.

During the week before the Love Won Out conference in February 2007, Alan Chambers told the Los Angeles Times that he wasn’t sure he’d ever met an ex-gay who ceased to “struggle” with same-sex attractions – and he made it clear at the conference that that included himself.

A pretty dismal picture for those who want to believe that homosexuality can be “cured”? I think so.

But let me ask you. If a friend were to become ex-gay, how would you treat him? I would imagine it would be hard not to feel betrayed, but could you put that aside?

Betrayed? Why on earth would I feel “betrayed”?

There is no issue of loyalty or commitment that is broken.

I think that what you are suggesting, Becky Sue, is that there is some agenda, some cultish association that insists on conformity to a predetermined mindset, belief, or way of conducting oneself. That if a gay person decides to become ex-gay that they are betraying “the cause”.

Nope. No cause here.

If someone wants to live a celibate life, I’m all for being supportive.

Just speaking for myself, I wouldn’t feel betrayed, as long as they were truly straight and happy (perhaps I’d chalk it up to another bi “convert” who just found the other side of his orientation). Now if they were just struggling with it and only hurting themselves, I would be a bit dismayed for them. And if they started to try to convert or lecture me, then I’d ditch them. Honestly I don’t have much of an investment in my friends’ sex lives (because *gasp* I’m in a monogamous relationship), so if they choose another path, no biggie. Just don’t start proselytizing to me and spouting half-truths that simply do not apply to my experience.

No BeckySue, you have met people who have “CLAIMED” to have changed.

Someone who appears to be interested in truth shouldn’t make that kind of obvious mistake.

A wise friend once told me that “we are the product of the stories we tell about ourselves…sometimes they are lies.”

I’ll agree with you that technically speaking its possible there could be health risks associated with monogamous sex, but as a matter of typical occurrance its reasonbable to say health risks are non-existant. Or as Jason D pointed out, you’re splitting hairs.