What's the Truth about Soulforce's Charges against James Dobson and Focus on the Family?

by Kermit Rainman

Soulforce's Rhetoric is Shrill and Vitriolic.

Mel White and his Soulforce organization accuse Dr. James Dobson and other biblically orthodox Christians of committing acts of “spiritual violence” against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. Specifically, they claim Dobson is a “victim of misinformation” and that his “harsh rhetoric” and “dangerous and misleading words” produce a climate of “unnecessary fear and panic” — leading to the degradation, injury, and murder of homosexuals. Beyond these scurrilous and unsubstantiated charges, Soulforce insists that Dr. Dobson’s “mistruths” and “abuse of the Bible” cause gays and lesbians to commit suicide.

Ironically, while admitting that Dr. Dobson may have insight into the truth that they do not have, Soulforce refuses to engage in public dialogue on the topic of homosexuality — emphatically stating that “the debate is over.”

Since Soulforce is publicly protesting the traditional position on homosexuality put forth by Focus on the Family and the vast majority of Christians across the millenia, it is appropriate to examine more closely their charges against Dr. Dobson and other biblically orthodox Christians.

1. “Dobson says that homosexuality is a mental disorder caused by family problems and bad parenting.”

The truth:

• Here, Soulforce greatly distorts Dobson’s views on the root causes of homosexuality. In fact, Dobson and many others in the mental health field see homosexuality as a developmental condition stemming from a combination of factors — including, but not limited to, dysfunctional family relationships.



• As a testimony to the reality that homosexuality is a developmental condition that can be overcome, many thousands of former homosexuals have come out of their gay and lesbian identities after coming to an understanding of the contributing factors to their same-sex attractions.



• In support of the environmental role that is involved in the development of homosexuality, even the pro-gay American Psychological Association admits that the current scientific consensus is that homosexuality results from a combination of biological, psychological and social/environmental factors.



• Significantly, Jones and Yarhouse found that pathology is far more common in homosexuals than heterosexuals. These unhealthy ways of coping include smoking, alcohol abuse, domestic violence, mental illness and promiscuity.



• Additionally, recent studies in the U.S., New Zealand and the Netherlands reveal a high correlation between homosexual behavior and mental illness. Indeed, in 1999 the Archives of General Psychiatry found that both gay men and lesbians have extremely high occurrence of psychiatric illness, drug and alcohol abuse and suicide. Well-respected gay researcher J. Michael Bailey says that “these studies contain arguably the best published data on the association between homosexuality and psychopathology” and that homosexuals are at “substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, anxiety disorder, and nicotine dependence….”

2. “Dobson says gay people want to destroy marriage and the family.”

The truth:

• Dobson’s comments on the impact of same-sex marriage on the biblical definition of marriage and family are directed at the homosexual activist lobby and their allies, not specific gay and lesbian individuals. It is disingenuous for Soulforce to insist that any redefinition of these foundational concepts in society will not inevitably lead to the destruction of the family unit.



• Leading voices in the gay activist community support Dr. Dobson’s observation that gay activists want to completely overhaul of the biblical concept of marriage and the family. Michelangelo Signorile, a prominent gay writer, argues that “gay men…simply transform the institution itself, making it more sexually open, even influencing their heterosexual counterparts.” In addition, influential gay author Andrew Sullivan boasts that homosexual relationships might even be superior to heterosexual marriage because of the homosexuals’ capacity to understand the need for “outside relationships.”



• In countries where same-sex marriages and civil unions have been instituted, studies show a corresponding devaluation of heterosexual marriage with significantly higher rates of cohabitation and children born out of wedlock.



• In redefining marriage and family, bigamy, polygamy, polyamory (group marriage) and marriage between relatives must logically and eventually be allowed as well.

3. “Dobson says same-gender parents are unfit and seek to hurt children.”

The truth:

• Here, Soulforce attempts to attribute a level of conscious maliciousness on the part of individual gays and lesbians as they distort Dr. Dobson’s comments about the negative impact of same-sex parenting on children.



• The overwhelming body of social science research agrees that children do best when raised in homes with married biological parents. Moreover, leading sociologists argue that the two sexes are fundamentally different — with each being culturally and biologically necessary for optimal child development.



• Same-gender marriages, however, necessarily deny children either a mother or a father. By creating intentionally motherless or fatherless homes, homosexual marriages put the wishes of the adults over the best interests of the children. What about the rights of each child to be raised by both a mother and father?



• Indeed, surveys show that the majority of children in homes with parents of the same gender are living with women. Forty years of research indicates that the potential ramifications for children raised without fathers is significant: poorer physical health, emotional health and school performance; increased risk of physical abuse; lower self-confidence; less respect for women and compassion for others; higher rates of criminal behavior; and more sexual experimentation with an earlier onset.



• Moreover, monogamous relationships among homosexuals are not the norm. While lesbian partnerships are of longer duration than male relationships, levels of promiscuity are surprisingly high. For example, gay researchers McWhirter and Mattison studied 156 gay male couples whose relationships lasted from one to 37 years. They found that all the couples whose relationships lasted more than five years incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity. There was not a single long-term monogamous couple.



• Similarly, in the Netherlands, where homosexuality is widely accepted, a 2003 study found the average duration of “steady” male partnerships to range from 0.75 to 2.25 years. These “steady” relationships were found to have an annual average of eight casual partners in addition to the significant other.



• Clearly, promiscuity and infidelity are not ideal for children, whether in a heterosexual or homosexual context.

4. “Dobson says homosexuality can be prevented by parents and cured through ‘reparative therapy’.”

The truth:

• Since evidence shows that homosexuality is best seen as a developmental condition resulting from a combination of factors (see #1), to say that it is preventable in the family setting is accurate. However, Dr. Dobson does not use the term “cure” when referring to the various approaches used by therapists in assisting individuals seeking to reorient their sexual identity. Here, Soulforce is putting words into Dr. Dobson’s mouth.



• Before it became “politically incorrect” in the 1980s to study this topic, many respected therapists and researchers reported surprisingly high rates of success in “reorientation” therapy. For example, world-renown sexologists Masters and Johnson reported in 1979 evidence of a 71.6 percent success rate for patients leaving homosexuality after a follow-up study of six years. Moreover, Dr. Charles Socarides, formerly professor at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, stated in 1978 “that there is at present sufficient evidence that in a majority of cases homosexuality can be successfully treated by psychoanalysis.”



• More recently, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover tabulated the success rates of several researchers and noted in 1996 that “the composite of these results gives an overall success rate of more 50%—where success is defined as ‘considerable’ to ‘complete’ change.”



• Significantly, one of the few researchers who has dared to study the phenomenon in recent years, Dr. Robert Spitzer of Columbia University, a pro-gay ally, concluded in 2001 that some highly motivated people can and do change their sexual orientation. For this he has incurred the wrath of gay activists.



• Changing one’s sexual identity isn’t just a “right-wing Christian” thing. Not only have thousands of people come out of their homosexual identities based upon firmly held religious convictions, many people in the secular arena have also changed their sexual orientation. For example, formerly gay-identified celebrities now reportedly involved in relationships with people of the opposite gender include actors Anne Heche and Julie Cypher, filmmaker Gregg Araki, British pop star Tom Robinson and prominent psychotherapist and author JoAnn Loulan.



• Ironically, Soulforce’s attempts to discredit those with differing viewpoints show a cruel disregard for individual civil and human rights. Indeed, all the major mental health associations — including most recently the American Counseling Association — have gone on record to affirm client rights to self-determination in their therapy options.

5. “Dobson says gays and lesbians are sick, ungodly people who want ‘special rights,’ not civil rights.”

The truth:

• Here, Soulforce mixes “apples and oranges.” Dr. Dobson has never specifically singled out gays and lesbians as “sick and ungodly people.” The Biblical view is that all humans — due to our individual and collective rebellion to God — are sick and ungodly, not just homosexuals.



• The wealthy and powerful gay lobby does, in fact, seek special rights and privileges. By erroneously equating their behaviorally based sexuality with such immutable characteristics as race and gender, they seek to qualify for protections not even afforded to such naturally occurring “classes” of people such as the mentally ill, the differently abled, and the elderly. Moreover, homosexuals do not fit criteria established by the Supreme Court for a specially protected class. Their average incomes, salaried positions and employment opportunities, levels of educational attainment, and even indicators of relative wealth such as overseas travel in no way reveal them to be a “disadvantaged” class as has been shown with race and gender.



• As referenced above, there is ample proof that homosexuality is changeable and that nobody is “born gay.”

6. “Dobson twists research to promote an anti-gay bias.”

The truth:

• As a primary source for research and truth, Soulforce relies heavily on position statements issued by various professional guilds and associations. A closer examination of the processes involved in the formulation of these statements reveals their politically driven nature and the non-representative and non-democratic involvement of a small cadre of individuals with strong and clear pro-gay biases. Moreover, rigorous analysis of reliable and valid studies in the preparation of these statements is routinely neglected.
  
  For example, the American Psychiatric Association produced a policy statement supporting the legal recognition of same-sex unions and their associated legal rights, benefits and responsibilities in 1997. The process involved a series of “committee-sponsored workshops” and involved only 150 participants out of a total professional membership of 38,000. The literature quoted is older and appears to have been selected to support the policy — which was arrived at on philosophic grounds.



• Also, the American Academy of Pediatrics adopted a policy in 2002 favoring the extension of parental rights to partners in same-gender households. Approved by the Board of Directors, the policy was not subjected to debate from the membership at large and generated a wave of protest when it was revealed that members of two of the eight committees supposedly approving the policy had, in fact, not approved it. Significantly, the policy was based largely upon a technical report by Dr. Ellen Perrin, which admitted to small and non-representative samples. Even pro-gay researchers Stacey and Biblarz cite the lack of reliable data upon which to base conclusions on homosexual parenting and child development outcomes.



• In spite of these examples and similarly observed problems with position statements from groups such as the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy, the American Academy of Family Practice, and the American Anthropological Association, Soulforce insists that the “wisdom of men” outweighs the wisdom of God in their attacks on Dr. Dobson.



• Ironically, evidence shows that it is the gay lobby that has twisted research to promote its agenda. Examples include the discredited myth that 10 percent of the population is gay and research pointing to a “gay gene” — subsequently found to be invalid and unreliable.

7. “Dobson deceives by omission: there are happy families he doesn’t want people to know about.”

The truth:

• Soulforce’s implication that Dr. Dobson is a liar who deceives by “omission” is scurrilous. Dr. Dobson has never said there are no “happy” gay people or that there can be no happiness in a same-gender household. However, as noted above, under #3, studies show that same-gender parenting arrangements reflect adult self-interest are not in the best interest of the children involved.

8. “Dobson’s word is not God’s Word: None of us owns a copyright on the Bible or a patent on Christianity.”

The truth:

• Dr. Dobson has never said that he owns a “copyright” on the Bible or that he has a “patent” on interpreting Scripture. It is disingenuous for Soulforce to level this charge, especially in light of its vociferous insistence that pro-gay revisionist theology is correct and Dr. Dobson’s views on homosexuality constitute “Bible abuse.”



• Dr. Dobson’s theological view of homosexuality is based on God’s created intent for human sexuality, which is clearly presented in the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures and reflects the image of God found only in mankind. This understanding and interpretation has been — and continues to be — held by the vast majority of scholars and laypersons in the Christian, Jewish and Muslim traditions.



• While it is possible to find theologians who will disagree on any point — even the most settled of moral doctrines, clearly it is Soulforce that departs from historical orthodoxy when they attempt to use Scripture to declare that homosexuality is not sinful.

If you enjoy reading stories like this one, sign up for the free CitizenLink Daily Update e-mail. You'll get news and commentary from Focus on the Family Action delivered right to your computer.