DiscussMormonism.com

Gay Electroshock- and Vomit-aversion Therapy at BYU...more mopologetic misinformation.

Two items, submitted for your consideration:

http://connellodonovan.com/abom.html

http://fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_gender_issues/Same-sex_attraction/Aversion_therapy_performed_at_BYU

The first article is Connell O’Donovon’s highly detailed account of gay electroshock- and vomit-aversion therepy performed at BYU. (Scroll down about three quarters of the way until you reach “Shocking Events at the Y”.)

The second article is FAIR’s evasive and, at times, downright dishonest account of the same.

I apologize for the length of these articles, but both are fascinating and highly informative, especially that by Connell O’Donovon. The article by FAIR is also fascinating in that it constitutes yet another example of “lying for the Lord”.

By saying this without having read either of these articles, are you “lying for the Lord”?

Tell me, Subgenius, why do Mormon apologists find it necessary to lie?

I will read these as soon as I have some time. Right now I am sobbing just from the dedication at the beginning of the first article.

Corpsegrinder wrote:Gay Electroshock- and Vomit-aversion Therapy at BYU...more mopologetic misinformation.

Two items, submitted for your consideration:

http://connellodonovan.com/abom.html

http://fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_gender_issues/Same-sex_attraction/Aversion_therapy_performed_at_BYU

The first article is Connell O’Donovon’s highly detailed account of gay electroshock- and vomit-aversion therepy performed at BYU. (Scroll down about three quarters of the way until you reach “Shocking Events at the Y”.)

The second article is FAIR’s evasive and, at times, downright dishonest account of the same.

I apologize for the length of these articles, but both are fascinating and highly informative, especially that by Connell O’Donovon. The article by FAIR is also fascinating in that it constitutes yet another example of “lying for the Lord”.

Decided to "just have a quick look" at the Connell O'Donovan article and couldn't stop reading. Just blew my lunch hour reading this thing. Fascinating - very well done.

A few weeks ago I was in Las Vegas on a business trip with a some ex-mormon colleagues. (Those who may have read posts wherein I have talked about our company know that we have a lot of 'em). The wife of one of these individuals also happened to be the mother of a very successful gay ex-mormon son. We were driving around killing time waiting for a red-eye flight home and the subject turned to Evergreen and the highly unethical treatment of gay members by the LDS Church of the kind described in the article.

Turns out this woman had never heard of this stuff before. As the conversation continued in this vein, she became more and more angry. Noticing her discomfort, I asked if her son (who had served an honorable mission) had even encountered Evergreen or this kind of rampant homophobia in the Church.

When she answered that he had not (at the level of electroshock anyway), I asked her why she seemed so upset. After all, I said, this is well known stuff. Sort of a mistake on my part - because it was not well known to her.

As she came to realize that we were not kidding about this stuff, she became truly outraged. At one point she said that she was ready to drive up to SLC and confront one or more senior Church leaders (BKP was mentioned specifically) while well armed. The idea was actually discussed briefly and dropped. The rental contract on the car was up and she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
__________

subgenius,

What may seem boring to you is life-changing to many. If you ever want to be an effective apologist, you would be a lot better off to read and understand this stuff, rather than to try to dodge and dismiss it out of hand.

Whether you believe it or not, this issue is a huge problem for the LDS Church and for those unfortunate enough to have taken up the burden of LDS apologetics. Running away from it doesn't help.

Also, why the concern about whether or not criminals have catapults? I think you will find that number of serious crimes being committed with catapults is truly insignificant. ;-)

Corpsegrinder wrote:By saying this without having read either of these articles, are you “lying for the Lord”?

Tell me, Subgenius, why do Mormon apologists find it necessary to lie?

i read most of each, and then passed out from boredom.
At best, the pro-biased-conspiracy laden LGBT link had interesting historical pictures.

Exactly what is the "lie" in the following statement on this subject?:
The Church never conducted aversion therapy. It doesn't conduct psychological therapy of any type. The LDS Church is a church, not a medical institution. People who happen to be LDS or go to BYU do a great variety of things. The Church does not take responsibility for everything done by a Mormon or someone at BYU (not everyone at BYU is a Mormon).

Once again, we see the LGBT's "issues" played out in some protracted manner as if to exclaim "Gotcha!", when in fact i do not think the Church has ever been ambiguous on its stance on LGBT.
As for your feeble attempt to associate BYU as the Church, good luck with that.
Now, i would also like to note that FAIR, by its own admission, is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
....Yawn

DrW wrote:subgenius,

What may seem boring to you is life-changing to many. If you ever want to be an effective apologist, you would be a lot better off to read and understand this stuff, rather than to try to dodge and dismiss it out of hand.

Whether you believe it or not, this issue is a huge problem for the LDS Church and for those unfortunate enough to have taken up the burden of LDS apologetics. Running away from it doesn't help.

Also, why the concern about whether or not criminals have catapults? I think you will find that number of serious crimes being committed with catapults is truly insignificant. ;-)

1. an apologist for BYU i have never claimed to be, the position of the LDS Church is quite clear when it comes to the LGBT community. Speculation about motives and would-be conspiracies from 4 and 5 decades ago has little modern-day applicability or interest. I dismiss it because it offers little new, pedestrian at best.
2. I am not aware of it being a "huge" problem. Do you mean to say that the LGBT is upset at the Church? well, i guess that does it!
3. Truly insignificant to those except they who were victims. It is my feeble attempt to invoke the Archie Bunker "would you feel better if they were pushed out a window?" proposal.


Was anyone ever forced to undergo any type of therapy? was anyone kidnapped and strapped to electrodes?

Subgenius wrote:

i read most of each, and then passed out from boredom.

I started the thread at 08:02 (my local time).

At 08:13 (my local time) Subgenius posted: “This baby (Subgenius) says: BORING!”

You read both of these lengthy articles in eleven minutes? …yeah, right.

Tell me, Subgenius, why do Mormon apologists find it necessary to lie?

At 10:27 (my local time) you posted:

i read most of each, and then passed out from boredom.
At best, the pro-biased-conspiracy laden LGBT link had interesting historical pictures.

Exactly what is the "lie" in the following statement on this subject?:
The Church never conducted aversion therapy. It doesn't conduct psychological therapy of any type. The LDS Church is a church, not a medical institution. People who happen to be LDS or go to BYU do a great variety of things. The Church does not take responsibility for everything done by a Mormon or someone at BYU (not everyone at BYU is a Mormon).

...indicating that in two hours and fourteen minutes you only managed to read the first four sentences of FAIR’s “boring” rebuttal, looked at some pictures in the O’Donovon article, and then “passed out form boredom”.

Tell me, Subgenius, why do Mormon apologists find it necessary to lie?

At 10:35 (my local time) Subgenius asked, “Was anyone ever forced to undergo any type of therapy? was anyone kidnapped and strapped to electrodes?”

This is an excellent question and the O’Donovon article answers it in great detail, but you would know that if you had actually read it.

It appears that it was part of the Honor Code, which must be signed and lived by all BYU students, that any known homosexual who stayed on as a student was REQUIRED to be in "therapy."

just me wrote:It appears that it was part of the Honor Code, which must be signed and lived by all BYU students, that any known homosexual who stayed on as a student was REQUIRED to be in "therapy."

Yes, but did anyone FORCE them to go to BYU?

Did anyone FORCE them to go to college at all?

Did anyone FORCE them to be LDS?

These people FREELY CHOSE to enter an environment where they would be discriminated against and tortured so they would stop having same-sex attractions!

The Church did nothing wrong! All is well! All is well!

subgenius wrote:Truly insignificant to those except they who were victims.

Can I borrow that line for the next time I post about Haun's Mill or the Carthage Jail?