Focus On The Family Promotes Dangerous 'Ex-Trans' Ministries
By Zack Ford on Oct 25, 2012 at 1:05 pm
&mobile=nc]http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/10/25/1090651/focus-on-the-family-ex-trans/?fb_action_ids=10151103839591451&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={%2210151103839591451%22%3A298085963637326}&action_type_map={%2210151103839591451%22%3A%22og.likes%22}&action_ref_map=[]&mobile=nc (http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/10/25/1090651/focus-on-the-family-ex-trans/?fb_action_ids=10151103839591451&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210151103839591451%22%3A298085963637326%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210151103839591451%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=[)
Focus on the Family's promotion of ex-gay therapy is nothing new, but this week the anti-LGBT group also started promoting "resources for ->-bleeped-<- and gender identity disorder." In addition to citing familiar ex-gay ministries, the links also include efforts to convince transgender people that their gender identities are wrong — the result of "confusion" — and that they should try to conform to their biological sex. For example, the UK ministry Parakaleo aims to help "those seeking to re-establish their God given gender identity and destiny." Another link highlights an author who claims to "expose and debunk the promises of gender change surgery."
Parakaleo aims to help "those seeking to re-establish their God given gender identity and destiny."
I like this part. My God given gender identity is that of a woman. And, my destiny in regards to this is to be the best Christian woman I can be.
It is so great they are going to help me with this. I wonder if that means they will donate money towards my transition? (written with extreme sarcasm!)
It is Focus On the Family. One of the most anti-GLBT organizations there is. They want internment camps.
Quote from: Ms. OBrien on October 25, 2012, 04:34:16 PM
It is Focus On the Family. One of the most anti-GLBT organizations there is. They want internment camps.
I am not totally apposed to placing them in internment camps. >:-)
Quote from: Brooke777 on October 25, 2012, 04:35:24 PM
I am not totally apposed to placing them in internment camps. >:-)
For us, silly Millie. (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsmileys.on-my-web.com%2Frepository%2FAnimals%2Fferret-4.gif&hash=34a3e40b48ee901ac7f4a696a28192c1777cff6e)
However now that you mention it. hmmmmm. (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsmileys.on-my-web.com%2Frepository%2FAnimals%2Fferret-8.gif&hash=d9498942f8bbb4bf3ad29af75944ea5e1135c6fa)
Quote from: Ms. OBrien on October 25, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
For us, silly Millie. (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsmileys.on-my-web.com%2Frepository%2FAnimals%2Fferret-4.gif&hash=34a3e40b48ee901ac7f4a696a28192c1777cff6e)
However now that you mention it. hmmmmm. (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsmileys.on-my-web.com%2Frepository%2FAnimals%2Fferret-8.gif&hash=d9498942f8bbb4bf3ad29af75944ea5e1135c6fa)
Yeah, I knew what you meant. I just really really really dislike those "people".
Quote from: Ms. OBrien on October 25, 2012, 04:41:29 PM
For us, silly Millie. (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsmileys.on-my-web.com%2Frepository%2FAnimals%2Fferret-4.gif&hash=34a3e40b48ee901ac7f4a696a28192c1777cff6e)
However now that you mention it. hmmmmm. (https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsmileys.on-my-web.com%2Frepository%2FAnimals%2Fferret-8.gif&hash=d9498942f8bbb4bf3ad29af75944ea5e1135c6fa)
Pffft. Bring it. Any scumbag that thinks they are going to put me in an internment camp better think again. They will need their delusional friends to clean up what is left of them after they get taken out. I know some people have this goofy idea that self defense is the same as random violence but there comes a time when you must defend yourself against freaks that believe they are right because "God is on their side".
Quote from: Laura91 on October 26, 2012, 12:48:03 PM
Pffft. Bring it. Any scumbag that thinks they are going to put me in an internment camp better think again. They will need their delusional friends to clean up what is left of them after they get taken out. I know some people have this goofy idea that self defense is the same as random violence but there comes a time when you must defend yourself against freaks that believe they are right because "God is on their side".
I will be fighting right by you on this one. They will certainly have a heck of a time taking me.
Quote from: Brooke777 on October 26, 2012, 12:51:17 PM
I will be fighting right by you on this one. They will certainly have a heck of a time taking me.
You know what another name for precision artillery is? Brooke with a bocce ball. I'll join your army any day.
History shows there is remarkably little resistance to rounding up groups of people. Most people have someone they need to protect and will behave accordingly.
Quote from: tekla on October 30, 2012, 08:57:10 AM
History shows there is remarkably little resistance to rounding up groups of people. Most people have someone they need to protect and will behave accordingly.
I do have to say, I would feel sorry for whom ever tries to round me and my family up. They will be in for a very short fight. Then the next person that comes will probably have a shorter fight.
Like I said, history tells us it's pretty easy. Once I have a gun to your families head - or even once I have them on the transport - you'll comply.
And they are going to start - most likely - by lying about the reason.
I'm not surprised. They have to 'protect' the children from us because they say that we are sick. Well, people have been overprotected to the point that they don't know what to do when a crisis comes up.
Quote from: tekla on October 30, 2012, 08:57:10 AM
History shows there is remarkably little resistance to rounding up groups of people. Most people have someone they need to protect and will behave accordingly.
That's a good point. But I only have myself to worry about so if I did die in the process of resisting and/or fighting that is the way it goes. The only thing I am willing to die for is my own freedom.
Quote from: Ms. OBrien on October 25, 2012, 04:34:16 PM
It is Focus On the Family. One of the most anti-GLBT organizations there is. They want internment camps.
Funny, I want the same thing for some of them ;) *sarc* but still it is very very scary with that kind of thinking. As for the OP itself it's just really sad what people will go through and what lengths they will do it just to fight off difference.
Hi,
Hows this then what have or do they say about us who are intersexed, any comments on that or do they lump us all in the same camp.
I sent an email to them 3 years ago & would i expect a reply i doughted then & id dought it now even if i send them another one. they have a mindset that does not include any thing that is different bare none so what about some fish or worms being intersexed, well no how can they accept those based on thier own teaching, & they wont talk to us so why bother with them.
...noeleena...
Quote from: noeleena on October 31, 2012, 03:07:14 AM
Hi,
Hows this then what have or do they say about us who are intersexed, any comments on that or do they lump us all in the same camp.
I sent an email to them 3 years ago & would i expect a reply i doughted then & id dought it now even if i send them another one. they have a mindset that does not include any thing that is different bare none so what about some fish or worms being intersexed, well no how can they accept those based on thier own teaching, & they wont talk to us so why bother with them.
...noeleena...
This is just my opinion. I think at the heart of it is easier to keep things "black and white". As long as they think intersexed people do not "really exist",they do not have to redefine things. It would shake some core beliefs if they were to acknowledge that intersexed people do exist.
The question is why would it do so? How do you deal with it when everything is defined in "black and white" terms? How would they go about defining who is and is not intesexed? Would it include some transsexuals or would all be included? How would they define the boundary lines? How are those who are intersexed to live their lives under their plumb line? These and a whole host of other questions never have to be answered as long as everything is defined by black and white boundaries.
They do acknowledge intersexed people exist.
They believe they are the category of "eunuchs who were born that way" (Matthew 19:11). And should live single lives, the "difficult path" they have been given by God. Essentially they should be asexual and aromantic, and stay the gender that they are raised as and/or assigned as at birth.
They also believe that it is such a rare condition to be essentially irrelevant during debates.
As a Christian, I'll say: Hogwash all of it. But that's what they believe. You can find some of their writings online about it.
They are also the type that believes "God created them men and women" and that someone isn't in one or the other category is "less than" and a result of the curse. More hogwash that ignores the nature of God. But they use this argument against gays, saying that "without both parts, which God made different - both man and woman - a family is incomplete." It's vital to their theology and hate that no man can be womanly or vise-versa.
My mother created me (with dad's helps of course ;)) and no god is responsible or worthy of credit in my creation.
I am a product of nature, not divine will.
Quote from: Slanan on October 31, 2012, 11:41:24 PM
They do acknowledge intersexed people exist.
They believe they are the category of "eunuchs who were born that way" (Matthew 19:11). And should live single lives, the "difficult path" they have been given by God. Essentially they should be asexual and aromantic, and stay the gender that they are raised as and/or assigned as at birth.
They also believe that it is such a rare condition to be essentially irrelevant during debates.
Thanks,
I tried for a long time and I could not find it.
It seems to me that it comes across as an attitude of tough cookies. If you have to deal with it it you have to tough it out. Sorry but for you there is no hope for a better life. You get to suffer. Too bad how sad for you. You are not allowed to be happy and whole. It sucks being you.
Sorry for the rant.
Quote from: SarahM777 on November 01, 2012, 07:33:38 AM
Thanks,
I tried for a long time and I could not find it.
It seems to me that it comes across as an attitude of tough cookies. If you have to deal with it it you have to tough it out. Sorry but for you there is no hope for a better life. You get to suffer. Too bad how sad for you. You are not allowed to be happy and whole. It sucks being you.
Sorry for the rant.
But its so much easier to tell someone else they have to suck it up and deal with it if the one doing the telling isn't dealing with it themselves. Sometimes it seems that the ones who get to interpret Scripture for the rest are the ones who don't seem to struggle.
The ones who have to struggle don't have the time to interpret it, or for that matter give a hoot about doing so.
Quote from: Vicky on November 02, 2012, 04:01:48 PM
The ones who have to struggle don't have the time to interpret it, or for that matter give a hoot about doing so.
Sometimes that's true, and sometimes that's not. The last couple of months have found me spending a ton of time trying to interpret correctly. And I'm still struggling. :)
Oh, yes...I've heard that BS "confused" part before. My mom still see it that way.
No...I am NOT the confused one. No confusion about it.
And, yes....I tried reparative therapy. I had it beaten over my head as a child, a teen and adult. All it managed to do was destroy my self-esteem and make me feel bad about myself so that SHE could feel good about herself as being "a good mother".
Yeah...that worked wonders, didn't it mom? Now instead of it being just me left to deal with a transition at a middle age, I also have a family who is trying to cope with the devastation.
No one can understand unless they've walked in our shoes.
Focus On The Family Rejects Trans Identities As Disordered And Unhealthy
By Zack Ford on Nov 5, 2012 at 5:15 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/11/05/1142931/focus-on-the-family-rejects-trans-identities-as-disordered-and-unhealthy/?mobile=nc (http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/11/05/1142931/focus-on-the-family-rejects-trans-identities-as-disordered-and-unhealthy/?mobile=nc)
Jeff Johnston is Focus on the Family's resident ex-gay, and he is increasingly being called upon to speak as an expert on various identity issues, though he bears no such expertise. Following up on the group's promotion of ex-transgender ministries, Johnston is back to spread a series of remarkable falsehoods about what it means to be trans. His claims are built around the false understanding that being trans is a disorder, even though the American Psychiatric Association is declassifying it as such next year. From this false premise, Johnston encourages many mistruths and harmful ideas for supporting transgender youth.
[...]
Johnston then claims the best way to support young people who are questioning their gender is to try to force them to accept the body they have, rejecting their gender identity:
Gender Identity Disorder is treatable. There are therapists who work with kids to help them accept the body they were born into and to embrace it as a good thing. This kind of therapy helps children to stop hating their bodies and to embrace their gender.
Trans identities reject Focus on the Family as disordered and unhealthy:
Bigotry is treatable. There are therapists who work with bigots to help them accept the world they were born into and to embrace it as a good thing. This kind of therapy helps bigots to stop hating their world and to embrace reality.
QuoteJohnston then claims the best way to support young people who are questioning their gender is to try to force them to accept the body they have, rejecting their gender identity.
I noticed that he said "force". Once again the kind of therapy that is rejected by the APA as junk therapy.
QuoteGender Identity Disorder is treatable. ...
Yes it is! HRT, SRS, FFS, BA. All recognized medical procedures. No shock therapy, no brainwashing.
What is it about the USA that when you get more than 50 miles inland from the coast people's brains switch off and religious mania takes over?
Why do these people hate us so much? It makes no sense.
Sometimes I am very glad to have 4,000 miles of ocean just off the UK's western shore...
Quote from: Ms. OBrien on November 07, 2012, 09:09:08 AM
I noticed that he said "force". Once again the kind of therapy that is rejected by the APA as junk therapy.
Wonder how Mr. Johnston would react to being "forced" to live as a woman for the rest of his life. After all, if he thinks it's reasonable to force Trans men to do this, shouldn't he be willing to do this himself?
Quote from: bev2 on November 07, 2012, 09:40:11 AM
What is it about the USA that when you get more than 50 miles inland from the coast people's brains switch off and religious mania takes over?
Why do these people hate us so much? It makes no sense.
Sometimes I am very glad to have 4,000 miles of ocean just off the UK's western shore...
I know what you mean. It's utterly alien to me and quite depressing really.
I live 22 miles inland from the So. California beaches. FOF was headquarted in a city just east of me, and only 31 miles from the beach until 1990. They had only been at a 600 foot elevation here, but where they now are is about 5000 foot, so its the thin oxygen they were craving. The problem with that theory is that they are near the site of Dr. Stanley Biber's hospital in Trinidad Colorado, and Colorado itself has a very trans friendly atmosphere in most places -- we do have tourist money!!
Quote from: Tesla on November 07, 2012, 10:01:58 AM
I know what you mean. It's utterly alien to me and quite depressing really.
It is very alien to me as well. Here in the UK, promoting statements of harm towards children can be enough to get the local council or cops interested in your activities. Over here there was a recent case of a therapist attempting to 'cure' a gay man with christian values and she lost her professional status and licence. She appealed the decision and was backed by senior Anglian Bishops which merely stoked the row further, but in the end she lost the appeal.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9283083/Christian-counsellors-being-closed-down-says-struck-off-gay-cure-psychotherapist.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9283083/Christian-counsellors-being-closed-down-says-struck-off-gay-cure-psychotherapist.html)
The reality is, anyone can be forced to believe anything.
Beat them enough times, threaten them enough times, displace their family enough times, starve them and/or make them unemployed enough times...
And they'll believe. Or die in the refusal. Meanwhile...if they're dead...who cares about them anymore? FOF--or the Soviets, or the Nazis, or the USG--can always rewrite history to make "those people" the bad guys.
Quote from: bev2 on November 07, 2012, 11:27:24 AM
It is very alien to me as well. Here in the UK, promoting statements of harm towards children can be enough to get the local council or cops interested in your activities. Over here there was a recent case of a therapist attempting to 'cure' a gay man with christian values and she lost her professional status and licence. She appealed the decision and was backed by senior Anglian Bishops which merely stoked the row further, but in the end she lost the appeal.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9283083/Christian-counsellors-being-closed-down-says-struck-off-gay-cure-psychotherapist.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9283083/Christian-counsellors-being-closed-down-says-struck-off-gay-cure-psychotherapist.html)
Ahh, Lesley Pilkington. She was interviewed on LBC radio, London, last year. She left me completely baffled. She is completely away with the fairies, to put it kindly. What's frightening is giving someone like her any meaningful political power.
Take it from this 60 year old who had suppressed her GID for most of her life. This birth sex 'embracement' is a ticking timebomb. GID treatment from someone who is ex-gay? Really? I may be ranting, but I have had it with the male gays anyway! I have nothing but unsuccess in trying to get along with that group. Is it because that in the past that one of the partners had to "camp out" in drag to be passable in public? Is it because that the TG community remind them of that past? Gay and transgender is like comparing apples and oranges! Some of the public perception of both of our groups is that we are fruits anyway!
Joelene
Quote from: Beth Andrea on November 07, 2012, 11:31:21 AM
The reality is, anyone can be forced to believe anything.
Beat them enough times, threaten them enough times, displace their family enough times, starve them and/or make them unemployed enough times...
And they'll believe. Or die in the refusal. Meanwhile...if they're dead...who cares about them anymore? FOF--or the Soviets, or the Nazis, or the USG--can always rewrite history to make "those people" the bad guys.
Very true!
What I find unhealthy is people telling us that we are. The APA has a history of pathologising African-Americans. IMHO, people who are spokespersons for ex-gay and ex-transgender 'ministres' are in denial about their own sexuality/gender identity.
"As Christians, of course, we'd say it's not healthy to encourage or promote recognition of a group based on their behaviors or based on something that's problematic psychologically. That's not the same as recognizing people because of their religion or the color of their skin, or things like this. At the same time we want Christians to reach out with love and treat people with respect. That has always been our goal."
I'm sorry buddy but you are not Christians.
Quote from: MaidofOrleans on November 08, 2012, 12:52:07 AM
"As Christians, of course, we'd say it's not healthy to encourage or promote recognition of a group based on their behaviors or based on something that's problematic psychologically. That's not the same as recognizing people because of their religion or the color of their skin, or things like this. At the same time we want Christians to reach out with love and treat people with respect. That has always been our goal."
I'm sorry buddy but you are not Christians.
Oh I can already imagine what would happen if you turned their statement around...
Say if a group of atheist activists said the same about Christians...
They would absolutely freak right out...and then be labeled as hypocrites.
Disclaimer- this only applies to Christians who preach love for all people and then turn around and start preaching hellfire and damnation to the "homosexuals and gender-confused."
Quote from: Vicky on November 07, 2012, 10:41:37 AM
I live 22 miles inland from the So. California beaches. FOF was headquarted in a city just east of me, and only 31 miles from the beach until 1990.
Oh dear! It is worse than I thought then - you only have to get 30 miles inland from the coast....
THINK PROGRESS
LGBT
Focus On The Family Rejects Trans Identities As Disordered And Unhealthy
By Zack Ford on Nov 5, 2012 at 5:15 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/11/05/1142931/focus-on-the-family-rejects-trans-identities-as-disordered-and-unhealthy/?mobile=nc (http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/11/05/1142931/focus-on-the-family-rejects-trans-identities-as-disordered-and-unhealthy/?mobile=nc)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F09%2FJeff-Johnston-Focus-on-the-Family.jpg&hash=b40f3b7030ad8faa1d2086a6eef1b97e58cdf04b)
Jeff Johnston, Focus on the Family
Jeff Johnston is Focus on the Family's resident ex-gay, and he is increasingly being called upon to speak as an expert on various identity issues, though he bears no such expertise. Following up on the group's promotion of ex-transgender ministries, Johnston is back to spread a series of remarkable falsehoods about what it means to be trans. His claims are built around the false understanding that being trans is a disorder, even though the American Psychiatric Association is declassifying it as such next year. From this false premise, Johnston encourages many mistruths and harmful ideas for supporting transgender youth.
First, Johnston claims that sexual orientation and gender identity are the same, which they aren't:
[Gender Identity Disorder] is a label usually given to children with same-sex attractions, but it can be given to adults.
The good news is that Focus is losing its' influence. When they were at their heyday (think CO Amendment 2), a politician would be terrified if Focus told people to vote for the politician's opponent. Today, not so much. They are losing power even in their home state - they kept civil unions from wining the last two legislative sessions, but now CO has a gay speaker of the house, and likely will get a gay president of the senate. A large part of this, and one of the huge reasons that the republicans lost control of the house this year in CO is that they followed Focus's advise and just plain came across as mean people. Even conservative grandmas don't like mean people. They've also had 3 layoffs in the last few years (including one of their former supposed "gender experts"). They are a shadow of what they once were.
That said, they are still hateful bigots disguising their misogyny as religious (I truly believe it's misogyny that motivates them primarily - and that is what drives the anti-gay and anti-trans stuff, as it's misogyny that drives the "men and women are different" line that they base everything on). I will certainly not cry when they get to do their final layoff.
The bad thing is that until they take their last breath, they are going to continue hurting people. ;(
Jeff Johnston based on your post sounds like a right royal brainwashed git or to borrow from a recently returned Sci-Fi classic a right smeghead. By the way what does CO stand for? I skimmed over abit. Will probably feel stupid shortly after receiving the answer
Ah fair enough..*stupid feeling creeping in* buzz off you!!! *stupid feeling creeps away* *replaced with feeling of awkwardness cause I am talking to and telling off my own words* *shifty eyes* :P
I tend to think that the world is evolving to a more tolerant place.
These people seem to be are a very vocal minority, some sort of disgruntled hold outs.
Anyhow their posture makes me anxious, as it's based in pseudo scientific/ pseudo religious thinking that can confuse and mislead the uninformed.
I don't know if it's better to silence them though, I prefer to be aware of people who hate openly than those who secretly do it.
I'm from Colorado. The problem is in El Paso county where Colorado Springs and FOTF is. The rest of CO are more liberal, especially around the Denver-Boulder metroplex. There were a series of amendments passed in 1992 that restricted same sex unions and changed the tax code. The fellow behind these was Douglas Bruce, a Colorado Springs car dealer. The tax code is called TABOR or the TAxpayers Bill Of Rights, an acronym that is a play on one of Colorado's mining pioneers Horace and Baby Doe Tabor. A version of that law still exist with less restrictions. Other states have passed a TABOR and some are pondering.
The Amendment 2, banning same-sex marriages, was passed on the same election and was overturned by SCOTUS.
Meanwhile, Douglas Bruce was convicted this past Feb. of tax evasion, money laundering and attempted improper influence of a public official. 180 days in Jail and $49K in fines. A real pillar of the community.
Joelene
Douglas Bruce is definitely pretty low in my book. And it wouldn't surprise me if he was somehow involved in Amendment 2. He definitely was involved in TABOR. But there is a bit more evil to go around.
That said, Amendment 2 didn't take away same sex marriage (earlier, CO had already heard that in courts and there was solid precedent banning same sex marriage). Amendment 2 was focused on preventing municipalities, particularly home rule municipalities, from enacting anti-discrimination employment, housing, public accommodation, etc, laws. This was a result of Boulder passing more laws to protect some people (the first laws passed in the 70s, and were related to housing discrimination). This was seen as sin and the destruction of Colorado by some. Essentially, Amendment 2 was intended to undo local laws and prevented future local laws that provided any anti-discrimination protection to gays. It was a statewide attempt to create a right to discriminate.
The official sponsor of Amendment 2 was "Colorado for Family Values." Their back-room sponsors are a who's who of right wing Christian groups, including Focus, AFA, etc. Right now a different car dealer runs what is left of it (he's from Denver, FWIW). Tancredo didn't have anything overtly to do with it, although I'm sure anti-tax and anti-gay fit together well in elections so I imagine there was some spillover. High turn out in support of either issue would help the other issue.
I remember listening to Focus on the Family broadcasts that explained they didn't want to discriminate, they just didn't want special rights for homosexuals. You couldn't listen to their programs without hearing that message. They didn't explicitly say "vote YES on Amendment 2", but it was clear that was the intent. So they were most definitely a huge factor. They also helped with the groundwork of getting local churches to mobilize their groups, by explaining to these churches how awful gays supposedly were, and how they would outlaw churches, convert kids to gay, and whatever other evil.
Same sex marriage was actually banned in 1975, due to a Boulder clerk issuing marriage licenses to 6 couples (the constitution at the time didn't prohibit it, nor did any state law). One of those couples is still married (their marriage has not been challenged - but all the ones challenged were ruled void). Someone tried to marry his horse in protest (it was denied - the horse was 8 years old, so was not yet old enough to consent). Colorado was the first state to marry gays (San Francisco has nothing on old Boulder - new Boulder is an entirely different matter). Sadly they don't allow gays to do so anymore, due to law changes.
In 96 and 97, a ban by the legislature was vetoed by the governor. In 2000, it passed and was signed by the governor.
In 2006 an initiative (or was it an voters?) was put to voters to allow civil unions. It failed. That same year, Amendment 43 banning same-sex marriage passed.
There was a legislative effort in 2011 and 2012 to pass civil unions in the legislature. It failed both times (it will almost certainly succeed in 2013, due to the Democrats taking control of the Colorado House and a very unpopular move by last term's Republican Speaker of the House).
maybe they should give them selfs the treatment so they can be more human
Quote from: Brooke777 on October 26, 2012, 12:51:17 PM
I will be fighting right by you on this one. They will certainly have a heck of a time taking me.
Add me to your list of people who will not be taken!
Quote from: Slanan on October 31, 2012, 11:41:24 PM
They do acknowledge intersexed people exist.
They believe they are the category of "eunuchs who were born that way" (Matthew 19:11). And should live single lives, the "difficult path" they have been given by God. Essentially they should be asexual and aromantic, and stay the gender that they are raised as and/or assigned as at birth.
They also believe that it is such a rare condition to be essentially irrelevant during debates.
As a Christian, I'll say: Hogwash all of it. But that's what they believe. You can find some of their writings online about it.
They are also the type that believes "God created them men and women" and that someone isn't in one or the other category is "less than" and a result of the curse. More hogwash that ignores the nature of God. But they use this argument against gays, saying that "without both parts, which God made different - both man and woman - a family is incomplete." It's vital to their theology and hate that no man can be womanly or vise-versa.
I had to comment on this because that is where alot of such believers (mind you-those who create their own word from such things) they take something like you stated *God created them men and woman* and they change this to fit their own fight.for example.in the begining god created adam and eve,now this states what? physically they were in order to reproduce,because yes-there must be a male and female to have children but this does NOT imply that god did NOT create us in that wrong body,that our destiny can not lay within what we *should* have been aka maybe (as i believe for myself) ones destiny can lay within that change.But he also says within that same book that the flesh is NOT who we are but what houses our true self.and that our beings *inside* will be created new.I wont touch on their idea of the *incomplete family* but that is also taken way out of context.i feel anyone who puts a limit on the very god they serve and promotes hatred should never be heard,ever.and in my opinion on the subject,i would die before being taken anywhere.
5 and 6 years ago, to my utter shame now, My younger son who is 24 now asked my wife and I to provide him with money to sponsor him to be able to attend a "retreat" in Texas over the Christmas holidays. He would not tell us what the retreat's focus was, but I have found out since that it was in fact one of these retreat camps that are set up to 'treat' TGs and cure them of the disorder. He still has not told us himself, I found out purely by the mistake of someone that he had taken into confidence, our pastor. Now 2 years ago after a lifetime of denial, when I first came to the point of realizing that I myself am GD/TG and was able to admit I have always been so, I had gone to my pastor who let it slip that I already knew someone who had gone to Texas to be cured of that very thing. Of course I was shocked and appalled, not that my son was the one I knew, but that my pastor had betrayed his confidence and shared identifying information with someone else. I have not shared another thing of any sort with my pastor since.
Before you start thinking that there is a genetic connection here, I refer to him as my Son but he is my step son, though I've been in his life for more than 1/2 his life. I fear for him and the shock that he and his wife of three years are in for when his walls collapse. When I do indeed come out to my wife and our sons, it is not just my own marriage that is at risk but his as well. (Oh boy, another load of bricks to carry.)
These places are dangerous and the knee jerk transphobia rampant in our churches is of epic proportions. I fear for those who will be rejected by their church who's job it is to love all comers.
I went to the link in the OP and then followed the links from there. I found the heart of this anti-trans campaign to be a wealthy transwoman who de-transitioned from being "Laura" to once again being "Walt Heyer". The information and rhetoric on his sites are horribly dangerous, false, biased, and I don't even know where to start with all of the wrong statements made by him on his sites.
All said and done, this "Walt" is someone who transitioned and then found that they were still dysphoric, depressed, etc. Laura/Walt did not even attempt to get psychiatric or psychological help to assist with the remaining unhappiness, did not do anything at all to move past surgical regret, and now blames the medical industry along with public morals, etc. for such personal dissatisfaction.
Walt bought into the FOF (Focus on The Family) hate model and is sponsored by "Citizen Link Radio" owned and operated by a subsidiary of Focus on The Family. Isn't that a real surprise??!! (sarcasm)
I am of the scientific thought that TG's who have surgery and then have regret or are still dysphoric and suffer from real and intense problems have more going on than surgery was going to fix anyway. They require prolonged psych supervision, support, and possibly even medication. People who de-transition as I am able to understand from the research I have done so far are only few and far between, but do so before even having surgery most times, and those who de-transition post surgery cannot possibly be as numerous as Walt says because there would be a HUGE medical backlash and it would be news, BIG news!
Me thinks Walt is either making things up, or is in with a group of drama queens / drama llamas who have an agenda.
Quote from: SandraJane on November 08, 2012, 05:10:22 PM
THINK PROGRESS
LGBT
Focus On The Family Rejects Trans Identities As Disordered And Unhealthy
By Zack Ford on Nov 5, 2012 at 5:15 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/11/05/1142931/focus-on-the-family-rejects-trans-identities-as-disordered-and-unhealthy/?mobile=nc (http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/11/05/1142931/focus-on-the-family-rejects-trans-identities-as-disordered-and-unhealthy/?mobile=nc)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F09%2FJeff-Johnston-Focus-on-the-Family.jpg&hash=b40f3b7030ad8faa1d2086a6eef1b97e58cdf04b)
Jeff Johnston, Focus on the Family
Jeff Johnston is Focus on the Family's resident ex-gay, and he is increasingly being called upon to speak as an expert on various identity issues, though he bears no such expertise. Following up on the group's promotion of ex-transgender ministries, Johnston is back to spread a series of remarkable falsehoods about what it means to be trans. His claims are built around the false understanding that being trans is a disorder, even though the American Psychiatric Association is declassifying it as such next year. From this false premise, Johnston encourages many mistruths and harmful ideas for supporting transgender youth.
First, Johnston claims that sexual orientation and gender identity are the same, which they aren't:
[Gender Identity Disorder] is a label usually given to children with same-sex attractions, but it can be given to adults.
Question: who made him an authority on transgender people? Probably wouldn't know one if someone was standing next to him. Second question: he's a part of the official media. There's the idea that if you're Not a part of the 'official' media then what someone outside of says is not valid. Well, official media has it wrong about MANY topics. Sad thing is that they are not at the forefront or spokespersons for the nearly 1 million homeless vets, or the 16 million children in America who go to bed hungry, or the millions of senior citizens who are poor and struggling.
Out with the old in with the New! :-*