That would be a perposterous way for me to spend my time. If you want to argue seriously that anti-homosexuality sentiment should be considered a psychological condition, for Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders purposed (which, needless to say, it currently is not),** then do so. Don't expect me to use my imagination to debunk every possible claim you might put forth, while you do absolutely nothing to bolster your own, currently non-existent argument.
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
But the guy in question was a leading spokesperson for the "ex-gay"
> movement:
>
Where did you get such a silly idea as that? Between April 1 and May 3, the day before this non-story broke, Google News returns exactly one article mentioning the guy. With standards like that, I hate to think what you might have pegged me as a "leading spokesman" for at various points. Frankly, the methodology through which DiscoverTheNetwork once decided that I was some kind of influential figure among the anti-globos seems to have been much sounder.
-- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað."