Media Has Already Pronounced Judgment Against JONAH in “Trial of the Century”

Plaintiff Benjamin Unger testifying last week in the JONAH trial in Jersey City, New Jersey

Last week, a historic lawsuit got underway, pitting the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), with an endowment over $300 million, against a small, Jewish non-profit counseling organization called Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing (JONAH). Dubbed as the “Trial of the Century,” the SPLC is representing four former clients who are suing JONAH under New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud law, alleging they were promised they would go from “gay” to “straight” in 2-4 years.

As an expert witness in the case, I read through thousands of depositions for both sides in preparation for trial, which I then used to formulate a report that was also based on my clinical practice with over 150 clients who experienced unwanted same-sex attractions (SSA). I also researched and cited over 200 hundred peer-reviewed journal articles that have been published in the scientific literature in the last century that demonstrates the mutability of homosexuality and the efficacy and scientific background of the counseling techniques utilized by JONAH.

This spring, the SPLC motioned the court to disqualify myself, as well as several other well-known mental health practitioners in our field that were named in the case to provide expert witness to the practices of JONAH, including Dr. Joseph Nicolosi and Dr. James Phelan. The SPLC claimed that I and other witnesses were providing scientifically refuted testimony that was outside the mainstream opinion of professional mental health organizations, chief among them, that we all considered homosexuality to be a mental illness. For the record, I have never publicly called or labeled homosexuality as such, but nevertheless, I and several others were dismissed for this reason.

On the other hand, the SPLC was allowed to keep all of their expert witnesses, none of whom have ever practiced therapy for clients with unwanted SSA. In fact, all of these witnesses believe that gay-affirming therapy is the only method a counselor should employ, whether a client’s homosexuality is wanted or undesired, despite the fact that there is no compelling scientific evidence that suggests gay-affirmative therapy is more effective than efforts to resolve unwanted homosexual feelings. Unfortunately, these little-known facts are rarely if ever reported by the media.

In fact, the sensationalism by the SPLC of some of the practices employed by JONAH life coach, Alan Downing, has undoubtedly played a factor in the pronouncement of judgment by the liberal press. Even before the trial began, the far left media began spreading the SPLC’s lies and actively distorting the evidence of what actually happened in sessions between Downing and some of these clients.

One of the worst purveyors of this spin is blogger Scott Bixby, who writes for Mic.com, a fringe liberal website that has recently been heavily funded by far-left millionaires seeking to indoctrinate millennials, most of whom have two-minute attention spans and are easily impressed by the website’s colorful graphics and tabloid-style headlines.

For example, Bixby only reported the side of SPLC when writing of the case, spinning key disputed details of a coaching exercise Downing has been criticized for using to heal body shame. In a later article after the trial got underway, Bixby used the SPLC’s angle and portrayed Downing as a pervert who was “collecting shirtless photographs” of his client. In actuality, Downing snagged the photos from the client’s (Benjamin Unger) Facebook page after the lawsuit was filed and sent them to his lawyers at the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund to prove that Unger, who took half-nude photos of himself in New York City, had no problem baring his half-naked body.

Truly, Unger’s public exhibitionism was much more vulnerable and exposing than the body shame exercise Downing employed. Based on the psychological concept of “peak experiences” developed by Abraham Maslow and Paul Bindrim, Downing instructs clients to remove an article of clothing for every negative message they believe about their body, and then once undressed, put on an article of clothing with a positive message. The basic concept is that physical nakedness facilitates emotional vulnerability and speeds up the client’s work towards resolving issues of trauma around the negative beliefs of one’s body.

While this is not a mainstream technique used by licensed counselors working with clients who experience unwanted SSA, and some may consider unorthodox, these practices have been used for decades in experiential healing weekends helping gay men feel better about their bodies. For example, the Mankind Project and Body Electric, two gay-affirming healing organizations, use very similar techniques to cater to the needs of the LGBT community. So one must ask the question: Why is the SPLC ok with groups using nudity to help gay men feel better about themselves, but calls Downing’s exercise to help clients with unwanted SSA heal body shame, “harmful” consumer fraud?

The answer, of course, is this trial is not about a couple of questionable techniques used by Downing. It’s entirely about the goal of overcoming homosexuality that JONAH was helping their clients pursue. The SPLC’s admitted objective to this case is to shut down every single organization and counselor, licensed or not, who disagrees that same-sex attraction is in-born and unchangeable. Unfortunately, the liberal media is cheering them on while only reporting one side.

Whether you agree with JONAH or Downing’s methods (which by the way, the body shame exercise constituted a very small percentage of the overall counseling methods used), it’s plain to see the hypocrisy and blatant disregard the SPLC and the media has in telling the whole truth. But then again, in today’s sexual culture wars, the ends justify the means. Except if that end is overcoming unwanted same-sex attractions. In that case, the “means” are always “harmful.” This article was first published at The Christian Post.

###

Christopher Doyle is a licensed clinical professional counselor and the director of the International Healing Foundation (www.ComingOutLoved.com). He is also a leader in the #TherapyEquality campaign with Equality And Justice For All (www.EqualityAndJusticeForAll.org)

Mr. Jo Colman                                                                         Mr. John Thomas
CEO                                                                                            Vice President, Publisher
Psychology Today                                                                    Psychology Today
115 E. 23rd St., 9^th Floor                                                         115 E. 23rd St., 9^th Floor
New York, NY 10010                                                               New York, NY 10010

March 18, 2015

Re: Removal of Sexual Orientation Change Effort (SOCE) Therapists on Psychology Today Website

Dear Mr. Colman and Mr. Thomas,

I was really disappointed to read that Psychology Today has developed a policy to exclude licensed mental health practitioners to advertise in your publication if their practice involves helping people like myself who have benefitted greatly from Sexual Orientation Change Effort (SOCE) therapy.

When gay activists originally demanded that you remove clinicians who advertise SOCE services from your publication, Mr. Charles Frank released the following statement: “We take care not to sit in judgment of others by allowing or denying individual participation.”But then, he quickly changed course and abandoned your non-judgmental position, capitulating to the bullying and intimidation of gay activists. While you are entitled to ignore the qualified practitioners who offer SOCE therapy, you cannot ignore the countless individuals who experience unwanted same-sex attractions (SSA) and seek change.

There are thousands of men and women like myself who experience unwanted SSA and choose a different path than the modern “gay” identity and life. For some, this decision involves their sincerely held religious and moral beliefs, for others, it is due to discovering that the “gay” construct simply does not work for them. I was one of those individuals.

At one point in my life, I identified as “gay” and pursued homosexual relationships for many years before realizing this identity and life was never going to make me happy. I then, out of my own free will, contacted Dr. Joseph Nicolosi and entered into Reparative Therapy from the years of 2009-2011. As a result of this therapy, every aspect of my life changed for the better. I am happier now more than ever.

For me, it was never about “curing” myself of every single sexual desire I find objectionable. It is about healing and wholeness, as well as living in congruity with who I believe I am. I found that healing wounds from childhood and adolescence made homosexual behavior much less compelling.

Even if you believe homosexual behavior to be healthy, surely you can see how healing emotional wounds and building self-image and self-worth is always a positive thing, regardless of your value and belief system. Reparative Therapy helped me reach a deep and lasting sense of congruity and wholeness, and I am forever thankful for those clinicians who offer this to clients.

That is why it saddens me to see Psychology Today abandon a bedrock principle of the mental health field, the right self-determination for the client. By removing clinicians who provide alternative treatments to gay-affirming therapy, you are essentially telling all of us that our goals are illegitimate and that all clients who experience conflicts over their homosexual feelings must accept the modern “gay” identity construct.

It troubles me that some gay activists see my choice as a threat to their own livelihood, and have chosen to provide misleading information to persuade you to believe that SOCE therapy is “potentially harmful.” This claim first appeared in a statement by the 2009 American Psychological Association’s (APA) “Task Force Report on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation.” The report simply repeated the same general disclaimer used for ALL therapeutic modalities, that they “COULD cause harm.”

However, there is no credible scientific evidence to prove that anyone has ever been harmed by Reparative Therapy or SOCE therapy, and the seven member panel of this report consisted of six openly gay therapists and one heterosexual who is an outspoken advocate for homosexuality. None of the seven ever practiced SOCE therapy, and in fact, had gone on the record as opposing SOCE therapy before the Task Force Report was ever written. The fact that they have been given any credibility on this subject is absurd.

Yet, three years prior, the President (Dr. Gerald Koocher) of the same APA said the following at their annual conference: “APA has no conflict with psychologists who help those distressed by unwanted homosexual attraction. As long as there is no coercion and proper consent is obtained, reorientation therapy is indeed ethical.” Indeed, the APA is speaking out of both sides of their mouth. How then can you take their opinions seriously? More importantly, what about the thousands of clients with unwanted same-sex attractions that read Psychology Today? Are you really going to abandon and disrespect them in favor of political correctness?

Two years ago, I started an international network of support groups for men and women like myself who are seeking help to overcome homosexuality (www.Joel225.org). The pressure from gay activists to shut down and silence individuals like me is incomprehensible. This issue does not apply to the gay community or to anyone who feels happy with a gay life. This is only for self-motivated individuals who are seeking out this type of therapy.

I realize that Psychology Today readers may have different views about homosexuality, but I hope you can see that SOCE therapy can be very a positive, affirming, and healing experience for individuals, like me, who have chosen a different path. I hope that you and Psychology Today will reconsider this decision and stop attempting to silence the voices of licensed practitioners who have helped thousands of us. I am one of them, and my voice deserves to be heard.

Sincerely,

Jeremy Schwab
Advisory Board, Voice of the Voiceless
www.VoiceoftheVoiceless.info

Stephen Black, Executive Director of Oklahoma’s First Stone Ministries and David Pickup, LMFT from Dallas, TX

In a historic move today,  the Oklahoma House Committee on Children, Youth, and Family Services passed HB 1598, the “Parental and Family Counseling Rights Protection” Act, with a 5-3 vote. The bill protects Oklahoma mental health providers, including faith-based counselors, who offer counseling, psychotherapy, and/or spiritual direction to minors who seek to reduce or eliminate unwanted homosexual feelings and/or gender identity confusion. The entire text of the bill can be viewed here.

Stephen Black, Executive Director of First Stone Ministries in Oklahoma City, OK was instrumental in the passing of this important legislation, as well as David Pickup, LMFT from Dallas, TX. Both Black and Pickup are former homosexuals who have experienced authentic change from their same-sex attractions, and testified today both as ex-gays and counselors who have gone onto to help others with unwanted same-sex attractions experience freedom.

Click here IMG_0528-1 to watch a video clip from Stephen Black, Executive Director of First Stone Ministries.

Click here IMG_0529 to watch a video clip from David Pickup, LMFT from Dallas, TX.

David Pickup e-mailed the following testimony from today’s healing:

The Oklahoma legislative committee passed the bill HB1598 to support therapeutic SOCE, and it is headed to the House of Representatives. If it succeeds there, and it most likely will, then it will go on to the Senate, which although tough, it may just be possible for the bill to pass into law. If so, Oklahoma will have the distinction of being the first state of the US to have a law in support of SOCE. Needless to say, we are very happy for this. One of the main questions that came up was a nail in the coffin to those who opposed this bill. I have no doubt that we succeeded significantly because we discussed the egregious harm any therapy ban bill would perpetrate onto SSA boys and girls whose homosexual feelings arose because of being sexually abused. Most people, when faced with the truth and implications of future therapy ban bills for minors, immediately see that support bills for SOCE therapy are necessary because of the virulent nature of gay activists. As should be obvious to all at this point, these gay activists are stopping at nothing to force all states to ratify their therapy bans for minors. We held the truth, the trump cards, and the committee heard us.