Saturday, July 07, 2007
Key: 'I am still dealing with all of my guilt'
Focus on the Family lauds Glatze's newfound straightness.
Why is it no one ever just says he was wrong, he repented and found he was straight?
Why is it "ex-gays" always claim to have been duped? The ones I've seen blame their former "lifestyle" on others.
Why did he wait 18 months to go public? I suspect he missed the limelight.
Why did he go public on WND of all places?
And this should alarm anyone:
"I'll never let anybody try to convince me otherwise, no matter how slick their tongues or how sad their story. I have seen it. I know the truth."
He was an unreasonable gay activist before, and now he's an unreasonable "ex-gay" who's found Jesus? And, reading the Bible "terrified" him?
He presumed to speak for all gays before, and now he presumes to speak for all ex-gays? There is no homosexuality that is not just lust and pornography?
I'm not gay, so I don't know. But does that mean that there is no heterosexuality that is not just lust and pornography?
Then there's this: "Even in the darkest days of late-night parties, substance abuse and all kinds of things -– when I felt like, 'Why am I here, what am I doing?' – there was always a voice there."
I'll buy that. But what does that have to do with homosexuality? Looks to me like another sex addict whose choice was SELF. Call it auto-erotic self actualization -- and he happened to be gay. He *needed* to repent, maybe, but more than a hetero sex user and drug abuser?
I'll bet he's not straight. I'll bet he's celibate. Big diff.
This reminds me of a Cheech y Chong routine: "I was all messed up on drugs. Now I'm all messed up on the Lord."
I smell a rat, or worse.
Of course he's not. This is so silly. It's also insulting. It's also, well, once again, silly. Celibate? Depends on how one defines that. My own interest in the whole ex-gay movement is the way in which, over time, they return to the fold, as it were. There are plenty of former ex-gays out there who talk about the different ways in which the ex-gay movement manipulates them. Some even talk about how their self-help groups tend to turn in to strange, psychosexual events.
Don't you think we should start with the lower animals and work our way up to make sure it can be done and works right?
I really don't know why reading the Bible would be all that frightening for a Homosexual. I can see it scaring the shit out of people who call other people sinners, rich people, gluttons or other sins that Jesus directly addressed but guess what is never mentioned in the new testament? Homosexuality. So unless you are a Jew, there is nothing in Jesus' teachings against homosexuality. However, based on Jesus' teachings I can tell you why Jerry Falwell is frying in hell right now.
I see a part of that statement there that includes you (people who call other people sinners). Your statement about Jerry Falwell, does it not fit into that category? I think that is bit over the top.
This is in reply to toad, just in case someone else gets all lathered up.
I read Toad to mean that Falwell was an arrogant, hate-filled gas bag with no clue what Jesus was-is all about. I took the frying-in-hell part to be a litle rherotical excess.
On the other hand, there are good arguments for assigning Falwell to a place lower than he or his adherents might expect, starting with this: The first shall be last.
These so-called ex-gays are confused, confused people. It's a little sad, actually. People who honestly don't realize they're gay, like a college classmate of my mother's who married and had a family and didn't come out until her forties--don't renounce straightness as a sin, although knowing what you are, attempting to cover it up, and seriously disrupting others' lives in the process is clearly unethical, whatever your orientation. But when you're an ex-gay, your former sexual identity is always sinful.
I am curious, though. Is it possible that changing orientations along the way is a natural, if relatively rare phenomenon?
:-) Yep. On the eunuch thing.
But I'd never thought of orientation being changeable -- that is, something that changes, as opposed to a behavior that one might follow, then abandon, then follow, etc.
Seems unlikely to me, just off rhe top of my head. People don't start out being right-handed and then become left-handed, do they? Hmmm.
Because everyone else in my family was right-handed, I had to be contrarian and choose left. Now it's pretty thoroughly ingrained as far as writing goes, but my right hand still seems to be dominant in everything else.
Oh, when will I finally shake off my willful sinfulness and revert to the handedness that God gave me? I ask you. And if I do, will I be in constant danger of backsliding?
Or maybe I'm like one of those metrosexual types, you know, the guys who are straight when it comes to women but have a way overdeveloped fashion sense? (The kind of man I avoid like the plague.)