As I understand it, inspecting one’s values, beliefs, and expectations is a part of Throckmorton’s SIT protocol.

The idea is to figure out just what you value and why and find a way to develop a long term plan for living according to those values.

If finding a mate has a higher value to you than living according to the teachings of some specific church, then that is the goal you plan for *. If you believe that your religious values or a traditional sexual ethic are more important to you that sexual or romantic fulfillment, then you examine what reasonable expectations you should have, likely celibacy, how to achieve those goals and how you can supplement some of the things you would ordinarily find in a partner.

And, yes, I think that SIT also assists in addressing transition so that one does not experience that “death” feeling. Perhaps that is an area where counselors from a evangelical background would be most helpful.

(* While I’ve never questioned him on this, I suspect that if you decided to go in the direction of looking for a mate, Throckmorton would encourage you to continue looking at your values and how they apply to that decision (ie monogamy, sexual responsibility, religious participation, etc.) and how to synthesize your life.)

Nevertheless, leaving your denomination can be perceived as “death”. One mitigating factor can be that such a transition need not be a “clean break”. It is possible to explore alternatives, before jumping in.

Back in 1974 Weinberg and Williams, in their study “Male Homosexuals: Their Problems and Adaptations”, recommended:

“The homosexual should in general re-evaluate moral interpretations which make him uncomfortable with his sexuality.” (Chapter 23, Practical Considerations)

Good, sound, practical advice.

Warren Throckmorten said just the other day in a CNN Belief Blog that the appropriate therapy for a man who is gay or a woman who is a lesbian who wants to live according to their closely held religious beliefs (They value their religion more than their natural sexual orientation) is to counsel them to become celibate, and that is what I agree with.

One understands his perspective, psychologically. It’s a sensible dodge.

But, celibacy, properly conceived, is an affirmative choice, not a retreat. What’s more, the practical reality is that not everyone with gay attractions / orientation is going to be cut out for celibacy.

Therefore, it is possible to counsel, in all honesty, that it is the religious beliefs that ought to be examined.

“If ex-gay clients are truly informed of the prospect for change — along with realistic definitions for what change means — and the difficulties that they will face and the added burdens that they will place on any spouses they choose to drag into their lives, and want to pursue their chosen lifestyle anyway, then more power to them.”

I’m saying that no medical psychological counseling should be available to do the above. Sexual orientation change therapy should NOT be approved by our major medical organizations, even for religious beliefs. If I am not mistaken they do approve of Sexual Orientation Change Efforts for individuals who have a strong religious belief, and I am not agreeing with that because of the harm to the heterosexual spouses, informed or uninformed. So I think I am kind of going against the grain here.

Orientation, straight or gay, is simply an aspect of who a person is, just like natural hair color or handedness. You can force a change if you want, but the original was no more “forced” on you than you are “forced” to eat in order to live. (I could claim that my chosen “values” preclude killing any living thing just so I can eat, but since humans cannot subsist on rocks, I’m outta luck – reality trumps my “values”)

It’s simply reality. You can accept it or look the fool by railing against it.

Does that spouse know his or her spouse is struggling with their sexual orientation? No one is suggesting that said heterosexual spouse does have a right to informed consent.

How would you address the issue you have brought up?”

StraightGrandmother responds- If a man who is gay or a woman who is a lesbain says says, “I value living with an opposite sex spouse and would like to marry and have a family, that is the life I want” I do not believe that there should be a policy in place for psychologists that says, ‘Okay let me help you get there” So what I am saying is I am NOT FOR approved psychological treatment for a person who is gay or lesbian who is desirous of receiving therapy to learn how to become attracted to persons of the opposite sex. Any my reasons are not for or against the person who is gay or lesbian, my reasons are because I want to protect the people who are heterosexual.

Warren Throckmorten said just the other day in a CNN Belief Blog that the appropriate therapy for a man who is gay or a woman who is a lesbian who wants to live according to their closely held religious beliefs (They value their religion more than their natural sexual orientation) is to counsel them to become celibate, and that is what I agree with.

In other words I do NOT agree that there should be any approved therapy to help men who are gay or women who are lesbian to CHANGE their natural sexual orientation BEHAVIOR, EVEN IF they say this is what they value.

So I am going against the grain here, interestingly I am agreeing with the Evangelical Psychologist and against the gay & lesbian community who is commenting here. Dr. Throckmorton said something in a comment within his blog that I am not 100% clear on, but I believe he said that only 1%-2% of people who attempt to live contra their natural sexual orientation are successful. So for the 99% – 98% of the spouses of these “failures” I think it is WRONG to harm them. I see the spouses as victims of the psychologists who are working to help “change” the men who are gay and women who are lesbian. A 1%-2% Success Rate is not anywhere near high enough to offer this type of therapy.