In 2009, Shadix, who as a young gay man underwent aversion therapy at the behest of his father, gave an exclusive interview to Wayne Besen of Truth Wins Out:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Glenn Shadix, April 15, 1952 – September 7, 2010

Gagnon is perhaps the most prolific biblical scholar supporting the traditional reading of the Bible on the subject of homosexuality. For years, he has happily propped up the anti-gay and ex-gay movements with his scholarship, going so far as to join the notoriously extreme Peter LaBarbera’s “Truth Academy.”

Marin, a one-time “Bible-banging homophobe,” says he wants to put aside theological issues and “build bridges” with gays and lesbians. He steers away from commenting publicly on whether homosexuality is right or wrong, and seems to encourage others–to the understandable frustration of many of his gay critics–to evade questions too.

Now the two have clashed, with Gagnon “stunned” at the attention Marin’s approach has received:

Andrew Marin’s book, Love Is an Orientation: Elevating the Conversation with the Gay Community (2009), has been gaining some traction in evangelical circles. Having just finished reading the book I am stunned that an evangelical press like InterVarsity would publish such a fatally flawed work—and that persons such as Scot McKnight (a New Testament professor at an evangelical university, North Park) and a certain Michelle Strombeck of Moody Broadcasting Network (a conservative evangelical organization) would provide endorsements for it. (A foreword by Brian McLaren is not surprising since McLaren had already surrendered to a homosexualist view. The same applies to Tony Campolo, whose enthusiastic video endorsement is posted on Marin’s site.)

Marin did not respond directly to Gagnon’s criticisms, but mentioned it on his blog, with the headline “Conservative theologian REALLY doesn’t like me, or anyone ASSOCIATED with me.” He refused to engage Gagnon’s analysis and pointed to this paragraph of Gagnon’s as a “big red flag”:

I have written extensively on homosexual practice for a decade now, with two academic books published and many scholarly articles and articles for a general audience. I’m widely recognized as the world’s leading authority on the subject, certainly from a ‘traditional’ (i.e. scriptural) perspective. Yet CBN never asked me for a comment on Marin’s work, much less ever devoted an article on my work.

Gagnon, never one to do things by halves, responded with 26 pages of comment. Yes, 26 pages, just because he was slighted by Marin.

Ironically, despite having glibly described Brian MacLaren as a “homosexualist,” Gagnon objects to being called a conservative, a term “designed to isolate me into some fundamentalist/evangelical ghetto.” Gagnon quite rightly realizes he was slighted by Marin, although Marin denies it, but why this ridiculous overreaction? Gagnon really, really hates being diminished in this way, and reacts in a way I’m not used to seeing scholars do. Yes, scholars engage other people’s substantial criticisms, but since when do they write full-length treatises because someone sniped at them on a blog?

Observe what happens (pages 22-26) when “John from Arizona (a born-again Christian and a brother in Christ)” sends him an email of a mere 48 words insinuating Gagnon is a closet homosexual. Gagnon responds with over 400. John replies again with 500 words and Gagnon in turn sends him a staggering 1,600 words. A university professor who invests so much time and energy into responding to what at the end of the day is internet bickering is not in a secure place.

And Marin? I’m not surprised he doesn’t directly address Gagnon’s criticisms, since Gagnon is probably right in much of his biblical exegesis. The Bible does say some very ugly things about homosexuals–the offensive thing about Gagnon is not that he thinks the Bible condemns homosexuality, but that he agrees with it and uses it to justify prejudice against gays and lesbians today.

I haven’t scratched the surface of what Marin has written, despite pressure to denounce him on this blog. I’m eager to see what Marin does with those problem texts. Does he avoid them, like he (I think) avoids questions about the morality of homosexuality? Marin is already finding out that this tack doesn’t please those on either side. So who is it benefiting?

-The New Zealand government denies charitable status to an ex-gay program.

-African viewers respond negatively to the sight of two women sharing a bed on an episode of Big Brother: Africa.

-Another Republican speaks out in favor of marriage equality.

-Tasmania, Australia takes a step toward recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.

-The Fifth District Court of Appeals overturns a lower court’s decision that would have allowed a married gay couple to divorce in Texas.

-Fidel Castro acknowledges the injustice of his government’s persecution of gay Cubans.

-Businesses in New York will now be required to include employees with same-sex partners under their bereavement leave policies.

-Christine Bakke points out why evangelicals who believe ex-gay theories about sexuality should value comprehensive anti-bullying programs.

-Miss Universe Jimena Navarrete supports marriage equality.

-Scandinavian Airlines launches a contest to hold the first in-flight gay wedding.

-Sally Kern reiterates her claim that gays are worse than terrorists.

-The parliament of New South Wales, Australia passes a bill allowing same-sex couples to adopt.

Only Comedy Central can really do justice to the absurdity of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill proponent Martin Ssempa.   Tosh.0 is one of my favorites.

Doing research  — where have I heard that one before?

“Wouldn’t it be great if this book could be a one-stop resource?” So we selected the main topics associated with homosexuality —theological, clinical, social, political, and familial—then solicited contributions from a variety of authors with specific expertise. The result is a comprehensive guide providing biblically based insights into the many issues the subject raises. [p16-emph in original]

There is much ground to cover here. The book is nearly 500 pages long and most of the information contained is an organized conglomeration of things we’ve been hearing for years and rebutted ad-nauseum. However, there are many studies, statistics and sources I am unfamiliar with that are in need of investigation by the “militant homosexual activist” slueuths among us.

In regard to that, and to their credit, they’ve not only put the footnotes at the end of each chapter, but also (in addition to website urls) list the page numbers of the books they cite from.

Joe Dallas and Nancy Heche are listed as the general editors. Though most of the book is written by Joe Dallas and Nancy Heche, contributing authors are listed as: Alan Chambers, Paul Copan, Melisa Fryrear, Mike Haley, Bill Maier and Randy Thomas.

All of whom, with the exception of Paul Copan (to my knowledge), are or were speakers at Love Won Out conferences:

Love Won Out: Christian experts will address everything from why some people struggle with homosexuality to practical ways the church can respond with the truth and grace of Christ. Whether you are a parent or friend of a gay loved one, a pastor or therapist looking for help to assist those struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions…

Given the number of contributing authors, this book is riddled with contradictions. Some small, some galaxical.

IMNSHO, the willingness of the authors to participate in the construction of this manifesto makes them party to everything that is said by everyone else. I say this because there is some serious ugliness contained within these pages. (Note: If any of them publicly denounce their involvement with this book I will eat my sock.)

[This following section is mostly a description of what Exodus International stands for, and is meant to put the contents of this book in perspective. Those of you who've been following the war on LGBTs will be familiar with most of it.]

Love Won Out used to be run by Focus on the Family but is now in the hands of Exodus International:

Policy Statement: Exodus International is a Christian organization dedicated to equipping and uniting agencies and individuals to effectively communicate the message of liberation from homosexuality, as well as how to effectively convey support and understanding to individuals facing the reality of a homosexual loved one. [emph mine]

“Liberation” being the key word in play:

Liberation: Definition: freedom

Synonyms: abolition, deliverance, democracy, emancipation, freeing, liberty, release, salvation, setting free, sovereignty, unchaining, unshackling

A closer look at Exodus reveals that their definition of “liberation” does NOT mean liberation from same-gender attractions. When pressed, they admit as much.

Despite their insistence that their message is meant for those with “unwanted same-sex attractions,” they continue to bandy about similar implications like beads thrown from floats at a New Orleans Mardi-gras parade. And in doing so, they tip their anti-gay-agenda hand.

Same-sex attractions become “temptations.” Homosexual-being becomes “tendencies,” an “identity” and a “lifestyle.” Change becomes a “change of mind” about one’s same-sex orientation, as opposed to a change in orientation, etc.

This jumble of word-play is a carefully crafted script meant to convince a secular society and pro-gay persons of faith, that the human-sexuality of LGBT persons is no more than a chosen identity.

Now convinced that we are too confused to recognize our “God-given heterosexuality” and our love for our partners as “counterfeit,” the voting public can now look upon our efforts to gain equal protection under the law as misguided at best.

In their (the anti-gay industry*) quest to validate their “deeply held religious beliefs,” they regularly use mistruths, distortions, omissions and bald-faced lies to prop up their criminally unsound arguments. It’s as though none of them have ever learned how to operate a search engine.

[* "family" and "traditional marriage" groups like Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council, et al]

Those who rely on these anti-gay “family” organizations to do their leg-work for them are another matter.

Some of them are indeed hateful bigots. Addicted to pride, they’re always looking for ways to increase their sense of superiority. And some of them are just too busy working and providing for their families to vet the information these “family” groups feed them. After all, these groups are run by “Christians,” so they must be trustworthy.

Like the politically motivated ex-gay movement, they too are pawns of the anti-gay industry.
—
In the introduction [p9], they acknowledge that concerns about “sexual morality” are in addition to concerns about “terrorism, poverty, violence” etc., and not in place of them.

Also, the words moral/morality, used to characterize “homosexual behavior” are sprinkled throughout like powdered sugar on a race-track sized doughnut (diabetics beware). And as usual, absolutely no explanation is given as to how consensual relationships/sex are in conflict with the Golden Rule–Jesus’ only* command.

[* Technically He gave two commandments; To love God first and to love your neighbor. But if you love God then you love Love, and by natural extension you would love your neighbor.]
—
I don’t recall an instance of the Bible being described as inerrant. Instead, the word “authoritative” is used.

Argument From Authority: the claim that the speaker [authors of the Bible] is an expert, and so should be trusted.

To utilize it in a sentence:

Joe Dallas: We regard both the Old and New Testaments as authoritative, much like Paul the apostle did when he affirmed:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16) [p11]

It’s also circular logic: How do I know that the Bible is authoritative? Because the Bible tells me that it’s authoritative.

I’m not passing judgment on the accuracy of the Bible, but I find it reprehensible to carry out a world-wide crusade—based SOLELY on belief—to convince others that an entire group of people are morally inferior.

Which brings me to another point in regard to those who claim that their beliefs are Biblically-based. I’ve been sparing with anti-gay activists since ’04 and I’ve almost never heard the words “eternal hell” uttered. One would think it would be a priority to warn we “godless sodomites” of such a grave threat.
—
Expectedly, the “clobber passages” are overused to the point of cliché. But I consider the use of this one to be especially egregious:

Leviticus 20:13:

If a man lies with a man…They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

So, not only must gay men be murdered, but being murdered will be our own fault.

Classy.
—

Joe Dallas: If we weren’t created, and therefore answered to no creator, we might judge the rightness or wrongness of our behavior by its rightness or wrongness in our own eyes. [p12]

One of their favorite memes, the notion that one needs to be told (namely by the Bible) the difference between right and wrong.

So blind to our “sin” are we that we refuse to see that our calling in life is to despise our own nature so much that we feel compelled to live celibate loveless lives in order to please a god who obviously didn’t see this coming before it created us…
—
Nancy Heche, the other general editor.:

My interest in homosexuality can be traced to my 25-year marriage to a man who, unbeknownst to me, was living a secret second life as a homosexual. It was his AIDS diagnosis (and eventual death) that finally brought our the truth. Years later, I would be dealing with this issue again from a more public perspective as my daughter, actress Anne Heche, embarked on a well publicized lesbian affair [with Ellen Degeneres]. I have recounted these experiences more fully in my book The Truth Comes Out. [p13]

—
It was apparent that some of the authors, some of the time, took great pains to live up to the “love” part of “speaking truth in love.” I admire the effort, but when it came down to it, it was still just candy coated toilet contents.

In the intro, Dallas says:

Wouldn’t it be great if we could equip Christians to discuss this subject intelligently and with confidence? [bold in original]

…We hope the Christian activist … will be empowered to field the tough question and argument that’ll be thrown his way. [p17]

Not to be left out, he says this about us:

Openly gay and lesbian readers seeking to know our position will scan these pages as well, and while they’ll dispute much of what’s written here, we hope they’ll at least find it to be reasonable, clear, and respectul. [p11 bold mine]

Too many things wrong with those statements to address right now. I hope to go over more of the specifics in future installments. Until then, I’ll leave you with this (An essay well worth reading in full):

Tom Cantine: Herein lies the most obvious moral danger of religious faith. In taking themselves to be guided by divinely ordained commandments, theists may be tempted to relax the rigor with which they scrutinize their actions, and are thus capable of the most unspeakable atrocities. That is, secure in the faith that God wills a certain course of action, they may be prepared to disregard any suggestion (even from their own consciences) that this may not in fact be the morally correct thing to do. … Unfortunately, it is also often a tenet of faith that to question God is itself an immoral act, and so it can become especially difficult to correct a moral error once it has been made on these grounds. This is because the difference between questioning a command of God and questioning one’s own understanding of that command is a subtle one, not at all easily recognized, and harder yet when any doubt is seen as weakness of faith and therefore sinful in itself.

…This pride is uniquely difficult to identify, for it is well cloaked in the garb of pious humility. What makes it so elusive is that it appears as a faith in God, when in reality it is a misplaced faith in one’s own judgment. It may well be that God is just and perfect and incapable of error, but we most certainly are none of these things, and to act with the firm belief that one is in perfect harmony with God’s perfectly just wishes is to lose sight of that truth. Indeed, the person who acts in this way is guilty of the greatest pride, for she puts her moral judgment on a level with God’s. She claims to know with absolute certainty that which can be known only to God. The faith here, then, is not in God at all, but in the individual’s own reliability in knowing God, and if we understand idolatry as the sin of ascribing divine significance to a human artifact, the pride involved is idolatrous when the individual believes her knowledge to be perfect in this regard.

More to come.

-LGBT demonstrators face off against supporters of anti-gay Cardinal Juan Sandoval Iniguez in Guadalajara, Mexico.

-Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America tries to correlate the low rate of high school graduation among black males with acceptance of same-sex marriage.

-A gay couple files a lawsuit challenging Wyoming’s marriage laws.

-Focus on the Family once again changes its tune to suit its agenda.

-Alyssa Eisenstein captures the opinions of Ugandans on the issue of homosexuality in their own words.

-A gay political candidate in Kansas receives a death threat.

-Former Republican Party chairman Ken Mehlman officially comes out of the closet.

-Gay actor and former Power Ranger David Yost shares his story.

-Rob Tisinai spells out full implications of the “love” Molotov Mitchell claims to have for his gay friends.

-Roger Ebert voices his support for marriage equality.

-Peter Yarrow and Noel Paul Stookey of Peter, Paul and Mary send a cease-and-desist letter to the National Organization for Marriage.

-Conservative British MP Crispin Blunt comes out of the closet.

The measure passed 36-0 without debate.

PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays) objected to the bill, and reportedly called the repeal effort “offensive.”

Minutes ago, Exodus President Alan Chambers announced the following on the organizations Facebook page:

Dear friends, please pray for us at Exodus. We have experienced an unexpectedly low giving season this summer coupled with much higher expenses (insurance, utilities, etc). Sadly, we have had to let several staff go. Your prayers are appreciated. For those who are also having to endure this unfriendly economy, our prayers are with you!

On his own page, Chambers adds that they have cut benefits as well.  Exodus left a modest set of leased offices in the Spring of 2008 in favor of their own building, complete with million dollar mortgage.  Servicing that debt can’t be helping now that funds are scarce and the demand for ex-gay referrals appears in decline.  The first indication of financial difficulties came with the layoffs of two staff members late that same year.

Where does one go with such a resume?

—
Edited 8/23/2010 to include archived image of Facebook entry which was blocked from general view after post.

This complicates the numerous twin studies that take place in the scientific world, including ones that explore the root of sexual orientation. While it doesn’t necessarily nullify conclusions reached during said studies, it does contradict the belief that any difference found in identical twins could only be attributed to factors that were epigenetic (having to do with the way genes are expressed during development) or otherwise environmental (the “nuture” factor).

Organizations like NARTH who claim to have science on their side will eagerly point to studies that show up to a 50% twin concordance for homosexuality, claiming that anything less than 100% “proves” that a “gay gene” doesn’t exist. And even Exodus International, a Christian organization that focuses on spiritual healing of homosexuality is an affiliate of NARTH and has this blurb on their site:

Current scientific research simply does not support the “gay gene” theory.

…
Researchers from all points of view have not found a 100% correlation among identical twin studies in their study groups. If homosexuality is solely a genetically based trait, there should be no variance among identical twins that share the same genetic history.

A search for the term “gay gene” on Exodus’ site yields 20 results, all in articles ranging from outright denial of genetic influence to defensive posturing that genes might determine some aspects of our lives, but not our morality.

The term “gay gene” is of course an archaic and scientifically inaccurate one, not used by anybody trying to propose a serious argument for the biological origin of non-heterosexual orientations. There is no gay gene just as there is no “left-handed gene,” though the latter trait is accepted unquestionably as biologically originated. Additionally, no serious scientific claim has been made that sexual orientation is “solely a genetic trait.” close attention has been paid to factors that influence gene expression, exposure to hormones in the womb, and physiological traits found to be common among those of a particular sexual orientation.

But now thanks to this research, scientists in all fields have a better understanding of why identical twins are so rarely completely the same – and a better understanding of why, despite genetic factors influencing to a point, one twin may be gay while the other is not.

-Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach reaches an agreement in federal court over his discharge under Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

-Mexico’s Supreme Court rules that same-sex couples in Mexico City have a right to adopt.

-The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals grants a stay on Judge Walker’s ruling against Proposition 8.

-Radio Host Penna Dexter recasts Brandon McInerny, murderer of gay teen Larry King, as King’s victim.

-Germany’s Constitutional Court grants equal inheritance rights to same-sex couples.

-BuzzFeed chronicles “The 10 Dumbest Maggie Gallagher Quotes.”

-A religious right group creatively edits a poll on its website.

-Conservative TV personality Elisabeth Hasselbeck declares her support for marriage equality.

-The Department of Defense receives a 25% response rate to its survey on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

-Wisconsin Family Action files a lawsuit challenging the state’s new domestic partner registry.

-The boycott against Target continues.

-The Alliance Defense Fund reveals that its previously declared neutrality on civil unions is purely circumstantial.

-A federal judge rules that NOM must disclose its donor list in accordance with Maine election laws.