Is the Religious Right Immune from Conduct that’s “Dangerous from a Medical, Spiritual, and Emotional Standpoint”?

Almost a week ago, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the children of a Georgia man could not be barred from visitation with their gay father and his partner. Makes sense, right? Well, predictably, Matt Barber vehemently disagreed, arguing that children who are exposed to a gay person will be damaged physically and emotionally:

Barber says there appears to be no consideration for the fact that children are very impressionable and could be harmed from exposure to a homosexual environment.

“Obviously it is not in the best interest of a child to be taken by his father and introduced to a group of people who are engaging in abhorrent sexual behaviors, who are modeling abhorrent sexual behaviors and celebration of that [which is] demonstrably dangerous from a medical, spiritual, and emotional standpoint,” said Barber

While I strongly disagree with Barber’s claim that it’s “dangerous from a medical, spiritual, and emotional standpoint” to have children interact with their loving father, I pose a question to Mr. Barber in light of a video that surfaced today.

The video is of an apparent “gay exorcism” of a 16-year-old boy, carried out by Manifested Glory Ministries, a Connecticut-based church. Throughout the video, the church elders can be heard calling on the “homosexual demons” to get out. The child is violently shaking, on the brink of a seizure, and repeatedly vomits as the elders continue to call on the “homosexual demons” to exit his body.

So, Mr. Barber, which seems to pose more of a threat to a child’s “medical, spiritual, and emotional” well-being: Allowing children visitation rights with their gay father, and thus avoiding the struggle of growing up in a single-parent environment, or convincing a child that the way he feels is demonic, thus calling for an exorcism which caused the 16-year-old to repeatedly vomit and convulse?

The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission was quick to provide a rebuttal to the widespread outrage that erupted upon the video’s surfacing:

Because the video is being so widely viewed on the internet, homosexual activists have viciously attacked the church. These are the same people who demand tolerance for their sexual sin.

By contrast, we know that homosexuals are allowed to participate in vile Gay Pride Parades and perverted fetish festivals on public property throughout the country. These events often involve criminally lewd and lascivious conduct that take place in the presence of children, yet they go unpunished.

Here’s the video, I’ll let you decide: