This is a step in the right direction. Next up, I’m sure NARTH will do the right thing and disavow all the junk science George Rekers provided them over the years on the subject of sexual orientation.
Haha, just kidding, NARTH will never do the right thing.
George Rekers resigned this morning from the board of NARTH, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, amid a gay escort scandal.
NARTH vice president of operations David Pruden tells TPMmuckraker that Rekers first offered his resignation last Thursday, and officially resigned today.
NARTH is a group that promotes the idea that homosexuality can, and should, be cured.
Pruden also denied a report in the Miami New Times that NARTH had been involved in helping Rekers respond to the media.
“NARTH has never had any role in advising Dr. Rekers except to suggest that if he is innocent he needs to get a good lawyer,” Pruden said in an email. “He has friends who are members of NARTH and they are free to talk with, advise, and needless to say, they are free to help him in any way they might select.”
(h/t Joe.My.God)
Resign? NARTH should use him as an example for the world and “cure” him, or can’t they?
I smell reality show.
Throckmorton is weighing in on this: “Apparently, at least some of Rekers’ work is going with him. The link to his controversial work opposing gay adoption is gone from the NARTH website as of this morning. NARTH’ Dave Pruden told me that NARTH did not agree with Rekers that Native Americans could be excluded from adoption based on high levels of substance abuse and other issues. As I reported last week, Rekers told the Florida court in the Gill adoption case that — using the same logic as he did in testifying against gays ‚Äî he believes the rationale could be used to exclude Native Americans. As of now, Rekers remains on the NARTH Advisory Board.”
“http://wthrockmorton.com/
I think a good case could be made for banning so-called ex-gays from adopting children. They are obviously unstable, damaged, and they experience high levels of delusion. Marriages to opposite sex spouses are likely to be dysfunctional in significant ways. If an adopted child were suspected of being gay, their life would be hell with an ex-gay parent. Ex-gays tend to be religious fanatics and would surely instill religious doctrine which would greatly reduce the chances of a child becoming a productive healthy happy adult.
http://www.narth.com/menus/advisors.html
The really frightening thing about the NARTH advisory board is the alphabet soup that follows each name on the list. These are presumably EDUCATED people, weaving their twisted, hateful theology into their worldview despite the fact that somewhere along the line they MUST have encountered evidence to the contrary. My only regret is that these programs cannot be shut down and all the men and women running them sentenced to long prison terms.
I kinda wonder how many of those MDs and PhDs are relevant to the areas of science on which NARTH claims to be an authority. In the creationism movement, you’ve got people with degrees in nutrition, psychiatry, and theology–or just flat-out bad degrees from crackpot schools that don’t teach anything–talking about biology and paleontology (and astronomy and geology, even if they have little to do with evolution). Considering the similar politics that are involved, I wouldn’t be surprised if the same thing is going on here. Then again, the creationist movement also has biologists and paleontologists distorting their own research, too, so you’re probably on the money there, Scott.
I was still wondering if Rekers is going to owe back over $120,000.00 worth of taxpayers’ money for all the damage that he caused to the LGBT community.
Fernando, my guess is “no”, These people are sadly lacking in ethics and unless Rekers is sued, the State of Florida is unlikely to see a penny of the funds returned.
Unless I’m mistaken, isn’t Rekers already ‘innocent’ of any crime? Is it a crime to hire a rentboy in Florida?
Pruden’s Freudian slip shows the reverse logic of NARTH – something about which you feel guilty must mean you are not innocent whatever the law says.
With Rekers’ lying, cheating, adulterous, hypocritical behaviour, the guilt must be off the scale. And he not innocent of the crime of oppression of LBGT people.
You know what people hate more than anything else? Lying. “I did not have sex with that woman”. We don’t really care, Mr. Clinton. The world would have respected you so much if only you’d have got on TV, smiled and said, “Boys…I made her SEE GOD! She said she’d never wash that dress.” I’m serious. Okay, not about those exact words but, the issue in religion, politics and sex is HONESTY. Sure, it would hurt (a little) to hear that an educated scientist hated homosexuality so much, they’ve dedicated their lifes to bashing us. Yet, we could still respect them as worthy adveraries if they were just upfront and honest about it! Christian and gay? Fine! Whatever. The issue IS hypocricy. I actually had a family member say, “it says in the Bible ‘they’ll hate you because they hated Him’”. The mysterious ‘they’ don’t hate you because you’re a great Christian. We hate you because you’re a lying, adulterous, hypocrite! Damn. Get a clue. I love what Wayne is doing here… MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE! Make them explain. Don’t let them forget.