Recently InterVarsity Press, a conservative Christian publisher, issued a book that has stirred up quite a bit of controversy. "A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality" by Dr. Joseph Nicolosi has been featured on national radio shows as well as on Fox's "O'Reilly Factor." The book, according to an article printed by the conservative Christian organization, Focus on the Family, "challenges the notion that homosexuality is genetic, and offers parents practical advice on how to prevent it. 'This book is about giving parents a choice,' said Nicolosi. 'Parents cannot prevent something they do not understand.'"
As I read the article that promotes this book, I wonder if Nicolosi and his supporters really understand homosexuality. For example, in one broadcast he spoke of "specific behavioral patterns in the parent-child relationship that encourage unhealthy same-sex attraction, such as a damaged relationship with a father or an overbearing mother." But there are many gay men and lesbians who have great relationships with their parents. Perhaps this explains the caveat of "unhealthy" same-sex attraction; perhaps Nicolosi admits that there is such a thing as healthy gay relationships.
But for Nicolosi, such relationships are fictions. In one-day seminars, he "helps the public navigate the myths clouding the issue of homosexuality" -- one of which is that two gay men or two lesbians can come together and live happily ever after, as in the new children's book, "King and King." Given what we see in the world around us, isn't it Nicolosi who is living in a fairy-tale world?
John Paulk, a self-described ex-gay, defended Nicolosi. "Thousands of former homosexuals, like myself, have benefited from the information presented in this book. Activist groups who promote the inaccurate theory that one is 'born gay' should not be allowed to monopolize the discussion. In the spirit of tolerance, we hope the message of this book will be promoted as part of the public debate as well."
Paulk forgets that he himself belongs to an "activist group" which promotes mis-truths about homosexuals. And given how loudly and often that "activist group" speaks out, he cannot be serious that gay people and their supporters are monopolizing the discussion.
But let us try to take Paulk and Nicolosi seriously. Let this book now become part of the public debate. Let's debate how the book assumes that all gays should want to be straight or that all parents should be concerned that their children may be gay. Let's debate how it implicitly denigrates those who find no fault with homosexuality. Let's talk about those gay men and lesbians who have great relationships with their folks and with each other. Let's admit that there is a "dark, intolerant, abusive side of the gay community" (as one defender of Nicolosi said about opponents to the book), just as there is a "dark, intolerant, abusive side" of the Christian community (no one has a monopoly on darkness, intolerance or abuse).
In short, let's ask what the limits of tolerance are on their side. Are they willing to tolerate a world that increasingly supports the right of gay men and lesbians to fall in love, set up house, and grow old together? If the answer is no -- and my experience as a former chaplain at a conservative Christian college says that this is their answer -- then let us ask them if their ultimate goal isn't the elimination of homosexuality (and homosexuals) altogether. Such a final solution should be abhorrent to all, including Nicolosi.
My parents understood homosexuality and did nothing to prevent me from being gay. They could not. Neither can Nicolosi.
Thank God.
