Author: Yarhouse, Mark A.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(4), Win 2005, pp. 291-292

Abstract: The article discusses various reports published within the issue, including one by Robert Gagnon about homosexuality and sexual identity, and another by Heather Looy on the relationship between gender identity and sexual attraction.

Authors: Jones, Stanton L.; Kwee, Alex W.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(4), Win 2005, pp. 304-316

Abstract: Contemporary scientific findings are selectively reviewed to ascertain if recent research necessitates altering the conclusion of Jones and Yarhouse (2000) that scientific arguments fail to warrant overturning the Church’s traditional teaching about homosexuality. Reviewing the findings in six key areas of etiological research, we conclude that findings of biological causation of homosexuality are not unequivocal, while there is suggestive but similarly inconclusive evidence of environmental causation. Next, using a cross-cultural comparison of psychopathology rates among homosexuals, we challenge the ‘heterosexist rejection’ argument as the sole causative explanation for heightened psychological distress in LGBT populations. Finally, we discuss Spitzer’s (2003) treatment outcome research and conclude that change, though of unknown frequency, does occur for some individuals and reorientation therapy (offered with appropriate informed consent) should not be dismissed as a treatment option. We reaffirm our prior conclusion that scientific research does not warrant a revision of the Church’s historic position on homosexuality.

Authors: Bassett, Rodney L.; Kirnan, Ryan; Hill, Matthew; Schultz, Alice

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24 (2), Sum 2005, pp. 165-175

Abstract:

Previous efforts to assess atitudes toward guy and lesbian persons have often confused the evaluation of homosexual persons and the evaluation of homosexual behavior. The Sexual Orientation and Practices (SOAP) scale is a questionnaire designed to differentiate between attitudes toward homosexual persons and homosexual behavior. To further validate the SOAP, a two-phase study was conducted. In the first phase, students at a Christian liberal arts college responded to questionnaire containing several measures in addition to the SOAP. In the second phase, using scores on the SOAP scale, students were divided into three groups (universally rejecting of homosexual persons and behavior, selectively accepting of homosexual persons but not behavior, and universally accepting of homosexual persons and behavior). Students from these three groups were then invited to participate in a decision-making task where they were given money and required to give at least some of it away (to the research project, to a local church that selectively accepted homosexual persons but not homosexual behavior, and/or to a local church that universally accepted homosexual persons and behavior). Results from both phases of the study supported the construct validity of the SOAP scale.