Author Archives: VoV Contributor

Gay Activists Hijack Civil Rights Event, Discriminate Against African-American Ex-Gay Donnie McClurklin

2Donnie Mc ClurkinIt’s a sad day in America when a Grammy Award winning Gospel singer, who is African-American, gets uninvited to perform at a civil rights celebration honoring the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. because it would “offend” gay activists.

But that’s exactly what has happened. Gay activists have successfully hijacked the civil rights movement in America, and last Saturday, held the city of Washington, D.C. and its Mayor Vincent Gray hostage unless ex-gay Donnie McClurklin was uninvited.

McClurkin was scheduled to headline the concert to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington. But gay activists objected because of his public statements opposing homosexuality and ex-gay testimony of being molested by male relatives as a child, living a gay life, and then coming out of homosexuality. “I’ve been through this and have experienced God’s power to change my lifestyle,” he wrote. “I am delivered and I know God can deliver others, too,” commented McClurkin in a 2002 online testimony.

Because of McClurkin’s ex-gay testimony and politically-incorrect views on homosexuality, he was labeled divisive and hateful by gay activists, who urged the Mayor to eliminate him from the D.C.-government-sponsored concert at the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial titled: “Reflections on Peace: From Gandhi to King.” Mayor Gray asked McClurkin to withdraw from the event, saying: “The Arts and Humanities Commission and Donnie McClurkin’s management decided that it would be best for him to withdraw because the purpose of the event is to bring people together.”

But according to McClurkin’s video statement posted online Saturday, it was not a mutual decision. Rather, he was on his way to the airport to fly up to Washington, D.C. on Friday when he received a call from the Mayor’s office saying he had been “uninvited from a concert that (he) was supposed to headline.”

In a phone interview on Monday with Voice of the Voiceless (VoV), Rob Marus, Communications Officer of the Washington, D.C. Mayor’s Office, confirmed that, “You cannot be discriminated against (in Washington, D.C.) because of your sexual orientation.” When asked if the Mayor’s office was aware that former homosexuals are covered under the Washington, D.C. sexual orientation non-discrimination laws, Marus commented: “Yes, we are aware that former homosexuals are a protected class against discrimination in the District, and yes, Mr. McClurkin has full freedom of speech and expression.”

So if McClurkin has full freedom of speech rights and is protected under sexual orientation non-discrimination laws, then Mayor Gray and the Washington, D.C. Arts and Humanities Commission seem to have committed a crime by eliminating McClurkin from the concert due to his statements on homosexuality and his ex-gay orientation.

In a statement over uninviting McClurkin, Mayor Gray said “the purpose of the event is to promote peace and harmony. That is what King was all about.”

But it was gay activists who threatened to protest and cause dissention at the event due to their intolerance for ex-gays and McClurkin’s views, not ex-gays and Christians protesting against inclusion for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons at the MLK Jr. Memorial Concert.

“If these gay activists were really about “peace and harmony” they would have come together and supported McClurkin’s music and participation, despite their differences,” commented Christopher Doyle, President and Co-Founder of Voice of the Voiceless. “Rather than focusing on McClurkin’s views of homosexuality and his decision to leave the gay life, these activists should have, in the spirit of cooperation, focused on what brings us all together – our differences. Instead, it proved to be yet another assault on freedom of speech and religious liberty by a group that demands tolerance the most, yet affords it the least.”

Nolan Williams, the concert’s director, said he would have preferred McClurkin to have performed. “Even in Tiananmen Square, they were singing ‘We Shall Overcome.’ The fight for human rights is a global fight that has to bring us together,” Williams said. “That has to bring us together whenever there are differences of opinions or differences in views. We still need to find a place to come together even when we don’t agree.”

It was later reported by The Christian Post that McCluklin’s promoters tried to have his act go on as scheduled and even rallied local D.C. pastors to put pressure on the mayor, but “the mayor’s office systematically and continually shut it down…” claimed McClurkin. Mayor Gray “refused to concede,” even after some pastors advocated on his behalf, McClurkin added.

In his video statement online, McClurkin said: “There should be freedom of speech as long as it’s done in love,” adding that he believes it is unfortunate that in today’s world, “a black man, a black artist is uninvited from a civil rights movement depicting the love, the unity, the peace, the tolerance.”

After consulting with the DC Office of Human Rights, VoV was sent the following statement yesterday afternoon:

“We are fortunate that in the District of Columbia, individuals cannot be discriminated because of their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. In 2009, the DC Superior Court ruled that those who identify as ex-gay are protected under the sexual orientation trait of the DC Human Rights Act, the District’s non-discrimination law. Therefore people who identify as ex-gay can file a complaint with our office if they believe they have been discriminated against while accessing housing, employment, a public accommodation or educational institution.”

Now, the question remains as to whether the D.C. Office of Human Rights will actually implement these laws and force Mayor Gray to comply with his own order, which forbids the District government and its agencies from discriminating against persons on the basis of sexual orientation. The order reads: “The Director of the D.C. Office of Human Rights, or the designee thereof, is authorized and directed to implement this Order and to monitor the compliance of executive departments and agencies with its directives.”

Therefore, the D.C. Office of Human Rights is obligated to take action and monitor the compliance of the D.C. Commission of the Arts and Humanities, which made the decision to remove Donnie McClurklin. The D.C. Office of Human Rights should also urge Mayor Gray to follow his own order which demands that “discrimination in violation of the Act will not be tolerated. Violators will be subject to disciplinary action.”

Stand with us and Demand that Mayor Vincent Gray and the Washington, D.C. Commission on Arts and Humanities Apologize For Discriminating Against Grammy-Award Winning Gospel Singer and Ex-Gay Donnie McClurkin and for the D.C. Office of Human Rights to force the Mayor and D.C. Commission on Arts and Humanities to comply with the Mayor’s own anti-discrimination Issuance. Click here to sign the petition.

 Christopher Doyle, M.A. is the Co-Founder and President of Voice of the Voiceless. For more information, visit: www.VoiceoftheVoiceless.info

 

A Mustard Seed Once Germinated Becomes a Full Grown Tree

Mambaonline marvels over the fact that a “few people attended the rally for former homosexuals in Washington, DC.”

May it be said that even the gay rights movement started with a humble beginning. Christopher Doyle, President and Co-Founder of Voice of the Voiceless is quoted saying:

“July 31, 2013 was a great day for former homosexuals in America! While the turnout was humble, the enthusiasm among those who participated in Ex-Gay Pride was immeasurable. Anti-ex-gay extremists are gleeful that “less than ten people showed up”…actually, by my count, nine former homosexuals (including an ex-transgender) and a half-dozen more allies came out to lobby Congress and show support at the press conference in front of the Supreme Court. While that number may be small, we have to start somewhere.”

Doyle continues:

“In my view, it is significant in our current anti-ex-gay climate that even ONE former homosexual is willing to share their experience and speak out publicly….  It only takes ONE ex-gay that has changed to put a wrench in the ‘born that way, cannot change’ strategy they [gay activists’] are using to deceive the public. The fact is, these activists cannot handle the existence of ONE person who says they have experienced change from same-sex attraction to opposite sex attraction, much less nine of us telling our stories at one time. So they need to mock, belittle, and downplay the significance of yesterday’s events. That is why there is so much anger. So much intimidation. So much disrespect. So much harassment.”

In South Africa the former homosexual awareness campaign is up and running. What started with a public declaration is now spreading like a wild fire amongst government officials, the South African human rights commission, the Justice Department, the media, gaymustard-tree_mist organizations, clergy, political parties, medical profession, psychological profession, and even the ordinary citizens.

An open letter was also addressed to the honorable Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Constitutional Court Judge Cameron, UN Human Rights Chief Navi Pillay and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, regarding the global public education campaign to raise awareness and respect for LGBTI equality, they announced in Cape Town, South Africa. It was brought to their attention that it is outright discrimination against former homosexuals to be excluded from this campaign and not to raise awareness and respect for them.

Let it be known, that a mustard seed once germinated becomes a full grown tree.

André Bekker is an Advisory Board Member of Voice of the Voiceless and a Theological Counselor with New Living Way Ministry in South Africa, ministering to people with Unwanted Same-Sex Attraction, their families, and loved ones.

 

Ex-Gay Awareness Events Planned for September 29-30, 2013

DCCapitolBuilding_SavetheDateSAVE THE DATE

SEPTEMBER 29-30, 2013

FIRST ANNUAL EX-GAY AWARENESS LOBBYING DAY AND DINNER

As a part of the First Annual Ex-Gay Awareness Month in our nation’s schools, Voice of the Voiceless and Equality and Justice for All are pleased to announce a lobbying day and evening dinner on September 30, 2013! More details to come in August.

Event Details

September 29, 2013 (7:00pm – 9:00pm) – Pre-Event Day Get Together and Lobbying Education Training (Location to be disclosed when you register)

September 30 (9:00am – 4:00pm) – Lobbying Congress and Senate on Capitol Hill (Appointments made on your own)

September 30 (6:00pm – 9:00pm) – Ex-Gay Awareness Dinner (Speakers TBA)

Travel Information

Out of town participants should fly into Reagan National Airport. The hotel provides complementary transportation to and from Reagan National Airport.

Lodging

A block of rooms has been reserved at the rate of $139 (plus tax) per night. The location of the hotel will be disclosed upon your registration.

To join Voice of the Voiceless and Equality and Justice for All on September 29-30, 2013 please e-mail [email protected] to register for the event.

South Africa’s Mambaonline Distorts the Truth About Former Homosexual Awareness Campaign

 

In response to the “FORMER HOMOSEXUAL AWARENESS CAMPAIGN” launched in South Africa, Mambaonline diverts the attention from the truth of the campaign to their politicized propaganda.

1005108_10152312769357524_1537315400_nOn Thursday, Mambaonline alerted the gay community via e-mail about the launch of the FORMER HOMOSEXUAL’S AWARENESS CAMPAIGN. In what started as a very factual summary, halfway through turned into a report diverting the attention of the readers away from the facts.

Very conveniently, the reporter mentions only the name of America’s National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) as a reference which was quoted in the article. He then goes on to discredit NARTH. However, he fails to point out that the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, and even gay rights activist, Peter Thatchel, were also referenced. He also fails to mention that all who were quoted came to the same conclusion: “There is no compelling evidence that anyone is determined from birth to be born homosexual.”

The reporter continues by saying: “Bekker’s latest campaign comes despite warnings from South African and leading international psychiatric groups that efforts to change people’s sexuality can be harmful, especially among desperate people and vulnerable minors.”

He continues: “It is not illegal to offer members of the public a ‘gay cure’ or reparative therapy services, however, the South African Society of Psychiatrists says that it ‘opposes any psychiatric treatment such as ‘reparative’ or ‘conversion’ therapy designed to change a person’s sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual. It has also warned that this kind of therapy ‘runs the risk of harming patients by causing depression, anxiety, and self-destructive behavior’.”

The South African Society of Psychiatrists’ warning is not based on the scientific evidence. All they do is echo what the rest of the world is saying. However, it is out of line with the American Psychiatric Associations’ findings in their 2009 Task Force report, entitled “Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation,” which contains a prominent section on sexual-orientation change efforts (SOCE). On page 83 of this report they conclude: “There are no scientifically rigorous studies of recent SOCE that would enable us to make a definitive statement about whether recent SOCE is safe or harmful and for whom.”

On July 30, 2013, Dr. Nicholas Cummings, a former APA president, recently wrote an article  in USA Today and  submitted an affidavit on June 30, 2013 to the New Jersey Superior Court opposing the lawsuit filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, who is running a hate campaign against ex-gays, confirmed that hundreds of his client’s were successful in changing their sexual orientation and that it is unethical to deprive a client of his freedom of choice.

In his article, Cummings wrote: “Accusing professionals who provide treatment for fully informed persons seeking to change their sexual orientation of perpetrating a fraud is not accurate. Such a tactic serves only to stigmatize the professional and shame the patient. A political agenda should not be permitted to prevent gays and lesbians who desire to undertake sexual reorientation efforts from exercising their right to self-determination.”

To further detract from the point, Mambaonline’s reporter then went on to close with Alan Chambers’ closing down of Exodus as another reason to oppose former homosexuals. For some years it was known that Exodus leadership was heading in the wrong direction. Seeing that Exodus was only an umbrella organization for a multitude of other ministries, these ministries one-by-one withdrew themselves from Exodus. Other Umbrella organization like Restored Hope Network and Hope For Wholeness came into existence to accommodate these ministries. The closing down of Exodus is not a major setback, but rather the ashes of a diminishing organization, with a leader that was not big enough to step down from his leadership, when his views were no longer in line with that of the organization he was leading.

Rather than report the campaign and science correctly, Mambaonline proved itself to be just another propaganda-spewing, pseudo-media outlet with an agenda.

André Bekker is an Advisory Board Member of Voice of the Voiceless and a Theological Counselor with New Living Way Ministry in South Africa, ministering to people with Unwanted Same-Sex Attraction, their families, and loved ones.

 

 

 

The Arguments Against Change

                                                By Rabbi Daniel Meir Horowitz

Note: This article was originally published at: http://www.jonahweb.org/article.php?secId=343

There has been much debate and heated discussion over the issue of changing one’s sexual orientation from that of homosexual to heterosexual. The “ex-gay” phenomenon has drawn incredulity, laughter, venom and vitriol. Emotions, however, contribute nothing to the debate except to draw attention away from the real issues. One does not need to be a scientist, doctor, theologian or protester. One merely needs to be a logical human being who attempts to analyze the pros and cons of attempting to change one’s Same-Sex Attractions (SSA) into something else.

Let us begin with the fundamental assumption that NO ONE will ever achieve real change if it is forced upon them. The person themselves must truly want it. This means that for whatever reason they feel that SSA does not fit in their lives, be it for religious, emotional, practical, or other motivations. This is a universal concept that applies to any form of behavior or personality modification. If a parent, peer, religious advisor, et al. convinces a person to attempt to change, when the person themselves does not really want to, not only will it not be effective, but can be detrimental and dangerous.

It is possible for a person be motivated by their religious beliefs to change themselves so they can live in a way that is in line with their religious dictates. But it must be an internal motivation to be in line with their values and mores, not an imposition from other human beings. G-d gave us free choice, and we must exercise it. If a person is being pressured to the point that they can’t say “No,” then their “Yes” isn’t worth too much. As soon as the pressure is released, the change will vanish. No competent therapist should be treating someone who is being forced into therapy. Only once a person truly wants to change, can any discussion of the possibility of change be entertained. It is then that they can they properly analyze the possible reasons to refrain from attempting it.

1) It’s Genetic – A hotly contested issue, of whether SSA is caused by nature, nurture, or both. I posit, however, that this is completely irrelevant! Even if it would be proven that SSA is completely genetic in origin, that fact should carry no weight in this discussion. The only thing that matters is whether it is possible to change once the SSA is there, not what caused it in the first place.

Society is full of people who attempt to override what their body naturally does. Baldness may or may not be genetic, yet most people don’t care; they merely want to deal with it. Being bald doesn’t fit the way they want to live their lives, and so they try alter their situation. One’s hair going gray as one gets older is caused by their genes, yet millions of people color their hair. If a child’s teeth grow in crooked, their parents pay thousands of dollars on braces. People’s genes gave them a certain nose, but they may choose surgery to give them a different one.

This applies to more internal things as well. Everyone has a different metabolism, and some people may be genetically predisposed to be heavier than others. That doesn’t stop people from dieting, having liposuction, or lap-band surgery. Stuttering is rarely considered a psychological problem, (although it can be exacerbated by stress), yet no one would criticize a person for seeking therapy to overcome it. Dyslexia is caused by problems with the brain’s ability to recognize and process symbols, yet we would all support someone who wanted to treat it. These people’s genes gave them certain symptoms that aren’t congruent with how they want to live their lives, or cause them discomfort or inconvenience. So they seek methods to remedy it. The only salient issue is whether those methods will be effective.

2. It Won’t Work – This is definitely a matter of extreme importance. If something definitely won’t work, then the time, effort, and expense involved are wasted. Worse, it sets one up for intense disappointment, leading to shame, depression, and perhaps even suicidal thoughts.

However, this only holds true when it is known that it won’t work. It would have to be proven to be ineffective in the vast majority of cases. Anecdotal evidence of some who have tried and failed is a poor substitute for scientific method. A true analysis must be made. It is sometimes not because the treatment doesn’t work, rather that the subject didn’t actually employ the treatment.

Imagine that a respected doctor created a new weight-loss system with strict nutritional rules and a hefty exercise regimen. If even most of the people who tried the diet fail to lose weight, it must first be examined how well they followed the rules. If they regularly cheated on the dietary requirements, or neglected their exercise, does that mean that the system is ineffective? It could mean that the system is difficult to follow, or lacking motivation mechanisms. It does not prove what would occur to someone who had followed the system properly.

I personally know of a man who recently gave up trying to overcome his SSA and moved in with a boyfriend. Yet, I recall two years ago visiting his apartment and seeing a pile of gay-porn DVD’s. When I questioned him about why he hadn’t thrown them out, he said, “I like them.” Is it any wonder that he ultimately didn’t succeed? It’s akin to an alcoholic keeping his favorite liquor in a cabinet, “just in case.” Of course, this is also anecdotal, and proves nothing. But without scientific evidence through a proper study, we can never know the whole story.

Furthermore, even if there is only a slight chance of change being effective, it is still that person’s right to try. Those who truly want to change feel that homosexual urges are incongruous with how they want to live their lives. For many, they are desperate for a way out. If so, is it wrong for them to try a therapy even if it would work only 10% of the time? It is common for people with various illnesses (G-d forbid) to seek therapies outside of the traditional mainstream approach. (Reparative therapists might bristle at this comparison, saying that their approach is mainstream. But let us assume otherwise, for the sake of argument.) This endeavor is only dangerous if that person neglects traditional medications that generally are effective. To attempt alternative therapies is their right. And they should be allowed to exercise it if they chose to do so.

Of course, this must be tempered with a dose of realism. No therapy is 100% effective. And those who seek alternative therapies need to remain grounded with the actual possibility of success. Entering the therapy with complete hope, while accepting the possibility of failure, is the dichotomy that must be employed. But, if those who wish to change understand that it is a long, hard, road and one that ultimately may not succeed, who are we to judge them for forging on?

3) It’s Discriminatory – There are those who say that if one pursues change from SSA that they are discriminating against those who live a gay lifestyle. This defies logic.

As mentioned above, people routinely have their hair dyed, their wrinkles touched up, and their receding hair lines proceeded. Are these people ageists, who discriminate against the elderly? Are those who diet considered insulting to the obese? Are those who learn methods to deal with their dyslexia prejudiced against other dyslexics?

The absurdity speaks for itself. How one chooses to live one’s life, with the choices they make for themselves, does not reflect on anyone else. I may choose a blue shirt, and you may choose green. Neither one is discriminatory. If someone feels that SSA does not belong in their life, it should not insult in any way those who live a gay lifestyle. While it may not feel right for this person, if it feels right to another, they should go right ahead. In America, everyone can choose to live their lives for themselves. Just as one may want the right to live as gay, one also has the right to choose not to.

4) It’s Expensive – Agreed. Any psychological therapy will be. This is something that one must evaluate and decide for themselves: Is it worth it to try? All of the pros and cons need to be carefully weighed together with all of the various investments of time, money, and effort. That calculation is something that each person must make for themselves.

In conclusion, it appears that there is no logical reason for recrimination against those who choose to change. No peer-reviewed study (or any study, for that matter) has proven reparative therapy to be totally ineffective. So long as someone goes into it with a clear motivation, an understanding of the probable outcomes and a commitment to do what is necessary, who are we to impugn them? There are no universal truths for what works best for every person. Let us allow those who choose to be gay to live in peace, and let us allow those who choose to attempt change to live in peace as well. And most importantly, let us allow all those who are undecided to know of BOTH options, so that they can make informed choices for themselves.