You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
'Ex-Gay' Group Operates Questionable Youth Boot Camp, Equates Gays with Satan;
Group Launches to Combat 'Ex-Gay' Programs
Washington, DC -- President George W. Bush invited an "ex-gay" leader whose organization operates a questionable youth boot camp, and equates gays with Satan, to his White House press conference in support of a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage.
Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, the nation's largest so-called "ex-gay" advocacy group, joined President Bush, conservative religious organizations and members of Congress at the White House today.
"It is unconscionable that President Bush would embrace a group that claims to 'pray away the gay'," said Wayne Besen, founder of Truth Wins Out, an organization that will combat "ex-gay" efforts. "Does President Bush endorse youth boot camps where underwear is confiscated to 'cure' people who are gay or lesbian?" asked Besen.
"They took away my Calvin Klein underwear," said Wade Richards, who attended Exodus International's "Love In Action" retreat. Richards said camp counselors believed there "seemed to be more of a sex appeal [issue] for men to wear Calvin Klein than it would if they wore Fruit of the Loom."
Exodus' "Love In Action" has also offered training for women to apply lipstick and seminars on touch football for men.
Additionally, Exodus' website promotes books by Andrew Cominskey which claim that "Satan delights in homosexual perversion" and that same-sex attraction's "source is demonic."
An 18-year old boy who was forced into Exodus' boot camp will appear this Wednesday at the launch of a new national organization, Truth Wins Out, aimed at exposing dangerous and unethical "ex-gay" programs:
- New Group Launch -
Truth Wins Out will launch Wednesday at the National Press Club with dramatic personal stories from victims of "ex-gay" programs, and insights into how those theories are woven into the debate over gay marriage. The press conference will also expose the new Right-wing strategy to force "ex-gay" theories into classrooms.
WHO: Truth Wins Out WHAT: A new national organization to combat so-called "ex-gay" efforts. WHEN: Wednesday, June 7th, 2006 WHERE: National Press Club, Zenger Room; 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, DC
NOTE TO MEDIA: A victim of the "ex-gay" program operated by President Bush's invited guest is available for interviews. E-mail: wbesen@truthwinsout.org
11 Comments:
This whole thing is totally surreal and kafkaesque! The lunatics are literally running the asylum or in this case the executive branch of the government. The bush cabal and his sham presidency will not only go down in history as one of the most inept and corrupt, but also one of the most retrograde, ignorant, anti-science and anti-modernism regimes that ever stained not only the oval office, but the entire world. Gary (NJ) ps...Robert F Kennedy Jr has an article in the current Rolling Stone that shows how bush and co. really did steal the 2004 election through Ohio. It's truely shocking and outrageous. I urge you all to read it.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/05/2006 5:59 PM
yep - this is all a travesty. does being an ex-gay make someone anti-gay? or did someone forget to tell them that you can be straight without being a bigot?
posted by Anonymous, at
6/05/2006 6:28 PM
Wayne why do we need a password to get into truthwinsout.org? I see the quack throckmorton was bitching about it.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/05/2006 7:03 PM
Truth Wins Out is still undergoing a face lift, as it is a new site. It will be up tomorrow at some point. Sorry for the inconvenience.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
6/05/2006 7:05 PM
Wayne,
A question for you...no-fault divorce has done a LOT of harm to people.
Would you be in favor of anything that makes it tougher to get divorce (many say 2/3 of today's divorces result from "low-conflict" situations not involving abuse, infidelity, etc.)...and/or would you be in favor of anything that at LEAST got people getting married to realize what a serious commitment (to each other and to their children) marriage is?
posted by Anonymous, at
6/05/2006 8:00 PM
I am for no-fault divorce. If two people don't want to be together, that is their personal business. I don't believe the government should force couples to stay together.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
6/06/2006 12:28 AM
I just read Michelle Goldberg's "The Ex-Gay Movement at the White House" at HuffingtonPost. This is beyond surreal - it's an outrage! It's cynical and debased. Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International invited to the White House? What does the ex-gay "ministry" have to do with the "preservation" of marriage - except to act as a bludgeon to beat a minority.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/06/2006 2:29 AM
Right now the number of the Beast isnt 666, it's 1600 Pennsylvania Ave!
posted by Anonymous, at
6/06/2006 9:15 AM
Wayne,
IMO, you're cutting your own throat.
Right now some are saying that allowing same-sex couples to marry would enhance "stability" for "society".
If you put together a movement that said "We're for legalization of same-sex marriage, but we're ALSO for making marriage stronger. We suggest couples should counsel before getting married, and we're for making it tougher to get a no-fault divorce (NOT divorce in genuine cases of abuse, etc.) which, as we've said time and again, has been used by straight people to hurt the "sanctity" of marriage to a far greater degree than we believe same-sex marriage ever will.
Wayne, if you took that position, I don't think you realize how insulated, I'd say even "innoculated", from so much criticism. So many of evangelical Christians, and people in general from what I see (especially as they get older and wiser) want to see marriage genuinely strengthened not watered down.
By putting down straight people for their embrace of quick divorce (i.e. Britney Spears) then supporting the "no-fault divorce" allowed in cases like hers, you just look like another group that says "We don't give a rat's rear end about what's really good for society, we just want ours like you've got yours."
You're missing a platinum opportunity, Wayne!
posted by Anonymous, at
6/06/2006 12:01 PM
anonymous,
I, for one, am in favor of strong marriage. I do support the idea of counseling before marriage, as many states require. I also find no-fault divorce to be troubling. However, I also recognize that establishing blame in a divorce can have devastating effects when the parties share children.
But above all of that, I favor federalism and equal access.
Federalism recognizes that what is good for Alabama may not be good for Massachusetts. It means that different states can come up with how much counseling is required to enter marriage or can opt for quicky marriages if that's the cultural value of their state. Alternately, some states can insist on more rigid requirements for divorce while other states may want nothing more than a wish to disolve. I beleive that there are still some states that are not no-fault states.
Republicans claim to favor federalism, but when it comes to gay marriage very few are willing to uphold this value (kudos to McCain and Sununu for consistency). The Senator from Alabama wants to dictate to Massachusetts and Connecticut that their state cannot recognize gay couples.
Equality of access means that whatever the rules are, they should be open to all players. The state cannot set up arbitrary classes of people and grant marriage to one while "protecting" marriage from the other.
All Americans pretent to share the belief of equal access. But when it comes to gay marriage, very few are willing to stand up for equality (kudos to Feingold for consistency).
Now there are times when federalism gives way to equal access. The Loving case is a good example. But it was federalism in action that brought about the cultural change that allowed Loving to be accepted by the nation. And I believe that is the model that will bring about equality for gay people, as well.
While I'm glad that the Democrats are opposing the amendment, I'm sad that their reason is purely political: to avoid having to run against this amendment in every state for every state legislature.
And while I'm glad that a handful of Republicans are opposing the amendment, I wish there was at least one that was willing to say that gay relationships deserve the same access to marriage that opposite-sex relationships have.
