You thought America’s eastern seaboard was the only place you’d find a “church” casting out a gay demon from a parishioner? You must have no faith in humanity!
The Rev. John Ogbe-Ogbeide, who runs the United Pentecostal Ministry in London, claims a startling record of four to five exorcisms per year — and that he’s got a 100 percent success rate. Miraculous, especially since other folks don’t appear to be able to mimic Ogbe-Ogbeide’s success rate.
Peterson Toscano, a gay rights activist who spent 17 years in ex-gay therapy, has been subjected to three exorcisms.
He told PinkNews.co.uk: “”The premise of these was that foreign demonic forces infiltrated my body and manipulated me so that I could not turn from being gay.
“I felt desperate for a cure especially after trying so hard to change through other means. I could not comprehend why I was still gay especially after all the promises.”
“In one case in New York, ” he said, “the exorcist and her team yelled and screamed at me in English and in ‘tongues’ for over an hour touching me all over my body, jabbing me in my gut, getting close into my face, peering deeply into my eyes in hopes of provoking these evil spirits. It got so loud and out of control that a neighbour called the police who, when they came, broke it up.
“This is a form of religious abuse and spiritual violence. I found the experienced traumatised me.”
Well, it’s not like they’re anti-gay or anything.
Matt
I mean really. When are these people going to learn that it’s genetic and not from a demon? If you want to make people straight you need to find the gene(s) that cause homosexuality and correct it there to cure them. Duh!
Tallskin
The fuckwit went through 3 exorcisms???
LOL you gotta larf
what an idiot
Andrew
[img]http://www.freethinker.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/satan1.jpg[/img]
Peter
Matt, Do you mean that the churches should try to change how God created them? Pretty weird!
Peter
Excuse me, I mean the geneticists.
Bill
This would be funny.
If it wasn’t so vile and disgusting.
This is nothing more than church-sanctioned mental abuse.
I wonder if Gays started or OWN church, where we were ‘casting out the demons’ of Heterosexuality from innocent kids, if OUR freedom of religion would be respected, as well?
I wonder…
Dude
@Tallskin – don’t be such an ass. Growing up steeped in a particularly strict religion can really fuck with your head. It beats you down where you are desperate enough to try anything.
bryce
@Matt:
i really appreciate and laugh with the tone of your post, but honest, i disagree.
homo is not an on/off switch, at least not one that is triggered 100% by genetics!
in fact, the recent studies identifying a correlation between probability of gayness and number of older brothers is absolute PROOF that genetics does not entirely pre-determine orientation.
surely not to imply that its a choice, only that a cock-lover is much more than the cum of his shromosomes!
TANK
If anything’s a choice, it’s religion. What we need to do is purify this world of the religious just as the religious wish to purify this world of anyone who disagrees with them. Surely the religious have caused and continue to cause more harm than homosexuality.
Now the science doesn’t support that it’s changeable, nor that it’s a choice. In fact, the science does indicate that it’s definitely more genetic than it is any other cause. And the recent studies identifying that correlation DO, in fact, indicate that it is genetic.
TANK
@TANK:
That first part was sarcasm. But it’s pretty much the same reasoning that the religious apply to homosexuality–but grounded in a FACT. That fact being that homosexuality is not harmful, but religion is demonstrably lethal.
bryce
@TANK:
a human’s full set of genes are determined at the moment of conception, when one sperm’s code is diced with one egg’s code.
the correlation referred to in our previous two posts results from the effects of the mother’s reactions to the baby’s presence inside her body during pregnancy, much later than the moment of conception.
:p
TANK
@bryce:
You’re a very ignorant. Please, don’t talk about biology or genetics like you have the first clue about either, because you don’t. Trust me.
Do you know what the gene that controls the width of a woman’s uterus is only responsible for? IQ. That gene effects IQ, because women with narrow birth canals cut off oxygen to the brain during birth, and lowers the child’s IQ.
So much for your theory that all genetic traits are determined at conception.
TANK
Besides, youcan, in light of your homophobia, it seems like you’d be extremely offended by discussions of genetics and biological evolution, and more at home discussing biblical creationism and flat earth theories.
bryce
@TANK:
i see more than enough of your comments on queerty to have a good idea of what youre up to.
in this not uncommon case, your arguments are irregardlessley to my discussion, your logic is flawd, and your knowledge is ________ . most unfortunately, your style of persuasion is childish and self-defeating.
youve gone off the deep end, how can the conversation continue after that?
goodnight, scumbag.
TANK
@bryce:
No kiss?
Helga von ornstein
And I thought that church in Conn. with the youtube exorcism was wacko.
Princess Pussyfoot
@TANK: You’d have to hose down that schlong of foreskin-easy, cheesy & sleazy! Too bad it’s JUST all skin with naught behind it. You might want to try sex reassignment surgery there’s enough skin there to finally, physically turn you into the biggest CUNT we’ve ever seen and match your personality!
TANK
you’re trash, pussy. Smelly trash.
M Shane
@No. 14 · bryce;
While it is most certainly unproven in any way that their is a gay genetic component. in determining sexuaityoverall, If I’m not mistaken, the older brother sibling studies were interpreted initially at least initially as proof of their being a genetic component ; not otherwise, as you suggested.. The explaination went something like that the mother had used up a certain heterosexualizing precurser in the male DNA which she had passed on previously to earlier male siblings and didn’t pass it on as readily afterwords to new boys.
This is of coyurse a lot of supposition that can eazily be explained (even better )as an experiential affect.of having older brothers. o you are probably right.
bryce
my original point was that gayness isnt a genetic on/off switch, not that there wasnt a genetic influence. my position still supposed that individuals are born with their sexualities.
@M Shane:
i will have to look into this a bit more, and hopefully more research comes to pass on this stuff. pretty interesting, no?
BB64
Wow. It’s impressive how an intellectual discussion can turn into a puerile pissing-contest within four or five paragraphs.
Seriously folks, I understand that it’s a very emotive issue for a great number of people, but it’s pretty pointless to get so worked up over a question that as of yet has no definitive scientific answer. I’m not exactly sure why the word ‘homophobia’ is being thrown around either seeing as no one seems to have suggested that homosexuality is immoral or a choice.
A person’s genetic makeup is generally determined at conception. Barring unexpected mutations during embryonic development or exposure to mutagens after birth, a person’s physiology is determined by a combination of dominant genetic material being expressed and environmental influence. Homosexuality cannot be due solely to genetic expression as there are documented cases of identical twins wherein one twin is gay and the other not. As identical twins share EXACTLY the same genetic makeup and only alter in appearance due to environmental factors, it would be impossible for one twin to be gay and the other not if homosexuality was 100% genetic. However, as other people have already mentioned, there is evidence to suggest that homosexuality is at least partly genetic. Statistical studies of male siblings are particularly supportive of a semi-genetic hypothesis, and as there are plenty of other biological characteristics humans exhibit due to a combination of both genetics and environmental triggers, it’s very possible that homosexuality is of the same vein.
Personally I think it’d be nice if people would believe the testimony of around 30 million gay Americans who insist that they don’t expose themselves to ridicule, violence and persecution just for the hell of it, but for some reason the nonsensical ramblings of psychotic bigots seems to be more persuasive. Given the lack of respect the latter group has for empirical evidence, I doubt finding proof of homosexuality’s genetic component will deter them, but maybe other people (those who have an IQ above that of a dead chipmunk) will rethink their position.
M Shane
No. 20 · bryce Yes! The subject of genetic/ situation is immensely interesting. Certainly, even if there was not a genetic predisposition the occurance is a product of such unconcious, almost neurological processes that there is clearly absolutely no choice involved. I think that most of us knew that at a fairly early age- I sure did, and wish for any similar kids that they had some guiltless information at hand.
People think that it would be less subject to intervention if sexuality was genetic but even if we were to say sexuality was just a gene that could be shut on and off, fanatics could decide to interfer on a genetic level before conception. I think that in reality there are probably a combination of factors . Like some things it could be determined in the womb, since we are there for nine months.
I have also got an abiding interest in how societys’ perceptions about sexuality make a difference in how we percieve ourselves and how people did that at other times, since we always had to be around.
Nothing could be more natureal than that kind of curiousity, but then I tend to wonder about a lot.