In a speech given November 12, 2021, at the University of Virginia, Mormon apostle Elder Dallin H. Oaks denied that electroshock and vomit aversion was used as a form of “gay conversion therapy” during Oaks’ tenure as president of Brigham Young University.

Join John Dehlin, Gerardo Sumano, Kyle Ashworth, and Connell O’Donovan as we discuss the history of electroshock therapy at BYU—and determine whether or not Oaks was being truthful about its use at BYU in the 1970s.

Show Notes:

—————

We are 100% donor funded! Please click HERE to donate and keep this content coming!

Click here to donate monthly: $10 $25 $50

—————

 

 

Download MP3

5 Comments

  1. Jeff November 18, 2021 at 4:44 pm - Reply

    One distinction without a difference: Connecting electrodes to the “groin” may not be quite the same as connecting to the genitals.

  2. Marie November 18, 2021 at 10:52 pm - Reply

    I am a nevermo who has a good friend who is a third generation Mormon. I listen to gain some understanding of how a wonderful, loving, joyous, and intelligent spirit can hold the beliefs of the LDS church. Thank you for what you do.

  3. Jerrie R Presley November 19, 2021 at 11:49 am - Reply

    I’m trying to stop commenting on these podcasts, but I can’t help but say something regarding the Oaks comment about not being recorded due to being taken out of context.

    This is yet another perfect example of how the church projects it’s own behaviors onto it’s critics. For instance, I only realized years after spending a mission bible bashing against Christians that I was the one taking bible scriptures out of context in order to make them prop up Mormon doctrine.

    The whole “taken out of context” thing is a favorite crutch for Mormonism and Mormon apologetics.

    The reality is that critics are more than happy to have the entirety of a talk, article, essay, or discussion made available so there can be no confusion as to what actually happened or what was actually said.

    Yet you often have the church with it’s usual “he was taken out of context” defense, even when the simplest investigation would prove otherwise. Such as when Hinkley was asked about whether the church still teaches that people can become Gods. The church would later claim “he was taken out of context”, yet there was no other context than that brief, to the point question and his brief answer!!

  4. Emma November 21, 2021 at 2:20 pm - Reply

    Hey John !!
    another fantastic podcast . such important information. glad you took all the time you did . four hours +2 hours and I never got bored

    just One suggestion —when you have a video that’s difficult to understand for your audience please read the transcript instead. it was very difficult to make out those videos.

    Also I like your podcast better without your female cohost…. it just flows better with you And your guests in my opinion ☺️

Leave A Comment