To Those Who Believe The Quality Ride is a Waste of Time

[glbt_equality]

My heart swells with love and respect for our intrepid young souls who have taken up the mantle for freedom and understanding -- but there are those, both within and outside our community, who believe such a task to be a fool's errand. To those people I post the following message, which you may feel free to repost and reuse and republish as you wish.

With love, Troy

When the Dust has Settled

It’s coming -- the writing is on the wall – a day when all Americans will be granted equal protection, by law, of their fundamental rights. You may be inclined, at the present moment, to blind yourself to the plight certain classes of people who are at present not allowed to marry or serve in the military. You may simply refuse to believe the fact that many are unjustly imprisoned, denied medical care, or even tortured or killed because of sanctioned prejudice and hateful ranting against the value of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered community.
Ironically, there are even members of this community – typically those who have never personally felt the sting or persecution – who are angered by what they perceive as an unnecessary plea for equality.
After the Second World War, everyone who was either directly or tacitly involved with the Nazi party wished to distance themselves from wartime persecution, yet we now recognize that everyone who played a part in the dialogue of hate, also played a role in the physical violence associated with it. When will we learn that it is NEVER ok to treat people as less than people? Even if the Nazis had won the war, and even if the concentration camps were still open and fully sanctioned by our government, they would still be wrong. The winners of a war may own the privilege of writing their history to suit their agenda, but they never have the privilege of truth. Truth transcends political agendas.

But the Nazis didn’t win the war… anymore than the religious right will win the war against human rights and equality. The writing is on the wall, and the days the US military can legally send gays and lesbians to prison is numbered, as are the days a transgendered woman can be legally sent to a men’s prison (where she is certain to be murdered), as are the days when a judge can split up a happy family simply because the child’s parents are homosexual.

So the question remains… which side are you on? And when the court decisions are finally made and the dust has settled – when all Americans are finally granted the most fundamental rights (the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness), how will you be remembered? Will you be like Jerry Falwell, who used biblical references to justify the continuation of segregation in the 1960s, or will you be remembered as the lone voice in the wilderness who shouted from the mountaintops, “enough!”
In 1992, I was a decorated Air Force captain who had flown many dangerous missions, putting my life on the line and even getting shot at in Central America in the line of duty for my country. I thought I was lucky, when the jury in my court-martial decided that I should simply receive a dishonorable discharge, rather than the nine years in prison the prosecution was recommending. Little did I realize my conviction for being gay would be a death sentence, however, when, years later, my lack of VA medical benefits would result in my being denied the healthcare my peers were able to take for granted.
Then, in Florida last November, Superior Court Judge John Lee Parrott was originally supportive and encouraging of the adoption he was preparing to grant, until he discovered, while skimming the home evaluation report, that the parents were a lesbian couple. Suddenly, “the judge’s mood shifted, and he began ‘acting really disgusted.’” The adoption was denied, though the couple is still appealing the case.

When the dust has settled. When all Americans are legally allowed to live and love, free of persecution and free of imprisonment – free to raise our children and free of fear of sanctioned violence, how do you want to be remembered? Will you be the prosecuting attorney in my case that asked the jury to send a homosexual to prison for nine years? Will you be the judge who splintered a loving family? Will you be the preacher who used the bible to justify segregation? Or will you even be the gay or lesbian person who’s apparently unaffected experience lead you to say nothing – or worse, to say that our fight for equality is unnecessary or embarrassing?

When the dust has settled, when all Americans are allowed to be who they are without reprisal – when hate speech has fallen out of vogue – when it is no longer accepted or popular to demonize a person because of who or how they love another… how will you be remembered? Will you be like the former Nazi Party member who grows silent and fades into the background, hoping against hope that no one will recall all the hateful things you said? Or will you continue the fight even after the war is lost – joining a supremacist group and frothing hatred at a remote private military camp?

When the dust has settled, when the courts have finally ruled, when we have finally remembered that “Christianity” is supposed to be based on the teachings of Christ – will you be proud of where you stood during the uncertain times, or will you simply crawl into a hole and hope no one remembers who you are, or what you said or who you hurt?

When the dust has settled, will you like yourself?

-- Troy Carlyle, writer, human rights advocate

[Vanessa White]

And thank you for your writing. I know clearly where I want to be when the dust settles, and it certainly is not in the recesses of others' minds, hoping that they "forget" who I may have been associated with. I have been quiet in the past, but NO MORE. I can no longer afford to not openly represent a segment of the LGBT community, and I will not be quieted because my words create discomfort for others. TOUGH. Whether they agree or disagree, listen or don't, are influenced or not, I will no longer be silenced. Thank you for the inspiration that you gave me through this to keep on..... Peace, Vanessa :love: :love:

[u-dog]

Troy,

Thank you for that power piece! Really makes me stop and think. Can you share more with us about your story? In your picture you don't look old enough to be a pilot right now much less in 1992 (not doubting your word!!!) I would just like to hear more about your experience during and after your court martial.

Dave

[glbt_equality]

Thanks for your response, Vanessa... the world needs more people like you!

And u-dog, I'm attaching the chapter from my book on the court-martial, which will give you more background on my particular story, if you're interested... and thanks for the compliment, it's always nice to hear you look younger than your years!

This is my first attempt at attaching a file to these forums, so I hope it works all right. You can also email me at glbt_equality@yahoo.com if you want me to send you the file directly.

I'm hopeful that the whole printed and published version of my book (entitled "The Remainder of My Life") will be available soon on Lulu and amazon... and thanks for your interest, though my primary reason for writing this particular article was in support of the Equality Riders!

Peace - Troy

[ladyinred]

"Or will you even be the gay or lesbian person who’s apparently unaffected experience lead you to say nothing – or worse, to say that our fight for equality is unnecessary or embarrassing?"

Definitely not, but I've met a few like that.Even though my life has been relatively untouched by violence and hatred,that does not undermine the fact that others have been touched by it,and I've seen discrimination toward friends of mine.I even wrote to friends about LGBT issues who said they weren't "political." But the fact is being passive and blind to it does not make it go away.Nor will it guarantee our rights.I guess people like that ,hope "one day.." But the fact is if we don't take an active stand, there won't be a one day..
The equality ride I think is essential to our movement, it I think will help open the eyes and hearts of many people.. Perhaps people who choose to criticize those of us who will speak up, should be characterized as following:
The version inscribed at the New England Holocaust Memorial in Boston, Massachusetts reads:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

[u-dog]

For sharing that powerful story. It is outrageous that anyone should be treated in that way. It is disgusting in the extreme that any American should be treated in that way. It is unforgivable that someone who has risked his life in defense of America should be subjected to that kind of witchhunt.

God Bless you Troy.

[simpleman]

Your entire story here mixes together two very separate spheres of society. On one hand you have the government, and the courts, etc. and on the other you have the moral beliefs of the "religious right".

I want to agree with you that gays should not be kicked out of the military. I think that the law should protect civil unions between consenting adults and that gays should not be denied VA benefits offered to other soldiers who aren't gay.

As for transgender persons being sent to their anatomical or original gender prison, what are the courts supposed to do? What if I got convicted of murder and I decided that I could dress up like a woman for court and then get sent to a women's prison? That wouldn't be right. The courts have to base their decisions on something and frankly allowing people to choose their own gender in terms of prison sentence can lead to tons more corruption of the judicial system.

What you are asking, essentially, is that the courts make laws against people exercising their right to freedom of association and dissociation, and that laws should be made against people's freedom of religion. In order for you to get "social rights" as you call them, you have to fabricate the new "rights" yourself and destroy old ones that have been around since the Constitution itself. The rights you are destroying, such as freedom of expression, religion, and association are rights that this country was built on. You basically are calling, aside from the rights involved with civil unions (which I said I agreed with earlier) for a right to not get your feelings hurt by people who hate gay people. People hate other people, and it's not right, but it's legally protected on private property. Good luck winning a case wherein you try to sue someone for calling you a euphemism. It won't work, because people have the right to hate other people, and craft policies to that end on their own property, even if it is wrong.

Now, you bring up the "truth" under the presumption that your "truth" is the right truth. Many people do that and I don't believe it is necessarily wrong, but once you try to disseminate your truth through the courts you are exactly like those that you accuse. They try to push through legislation outlawing homosexuality because they think it's wrong, while at the same time you are trying to push through legislation that corresponds to your version of the truth.

Now, comparing the religious right to the Nazis is a long way off base. The Nazis actually tortured and killed people (don't even try to say that suicide due to "spiritual violence" is the same thing, it isn't). You say that people like me, those who dissent the use of legal tactics to push your own agenda, will end up like those charged at the Nuremberg trials. Those charged at the Nuremberg trials actually oversaw and crafted government policies that promoted killing Jews, and dissent was punishable by death. Therefore, regular poor Germans would obviously not dissent to it, not to mention that many of them were told that what we call the Holocaust wasn't actually happening. These poor regular Germans who simply condoned the actions of the government were doing so so that they and their families could eat and that they themselves would not be tossed in with the Jews in the camps. To say that anything about American society today is anything like the Nazi movement is absolutely absurd. Sure there are iniquities, but they don't end up with the GOVERNMENT torturing and killing people for dissent or for their race, sexual orientation, etc.

Gays fundamental civil rights are intact, and they are denied nothing aside from civil union. This being said, civil union and the Christian colleges private property policies have very little in common other than that Christian colleges should have the right to have their own policies just like gays should have the rights to legal unions. Now, not being hated or despised is not a part of "fundamental rights". I know that many gays feel hated and despised, but this is far from a denial of fundamental rights.

I'm sorry that you were wronged, and you should seek restoration of your name in the armed forces, assuming that the only reason you were discharged was because you were gay. But don't go calling for the downfall of private property and freedom of expression rights because they hurt your feelings or somehow hurt your "cause".

[andrewlittle]

Your entire story here mixes together two very separate spheres of society. On one hand you have the government, and the courts, etc. and on the other you have the moral beliefs of the "religious right".
Mixed together because the religious right is using political and social pressure to advance its religious bias into law. If the spheres were indeed separate, there would be far less of an issue. The Bush administration, in particular, is heavily weighted with conservative Christian college graduates - graduates who were taught that God considers same-sex relations abominations. These religiously biased conservatives, along with the great extent of well-funded religio-social conservative organizations are campaigning vehemently to legislate against those they feel, religiously, are sinners.

[simpleman]

The Bush administration, in particular, is heavily weighted with conservative Christian college graduates - graduates who were taught that God considers same-sex relations abominations. These religiously biased conservatives, along with the great extent of well-funded religio-social conservative organizations are campaigning vehemently to legislate against those they feel, religiously, are sinners.

Oh I agree. I entirely disagree with injecting personal religious beliefs into legislation at this point. When the country was being founded, the founding fathers created a code of religious freedom, and this needs to be upheld. I know that there's a lot of it flying around on Capitol Hill, but you saw that the anti-gay-marriage amendment got shot down, as well it should have been. That amendment was based solely on the moral judgment of certain religious types, not on any kind of precedent. Therefore, it had no place in public policy. However, this dynamic changes entirely when private property comes into the equation. If you run a Christian college, i.e. a private educational facility wherein you wish to teach a set of moral principles in addition to the typical collegiate curriculum, you have a right to set those moral principles. If a student does not wish to believe those moral principles or abide by them, they are more than free to go elsewhere. I entirely understand that SoulForce wants to change those moral principles so that these colleges do not teach that being gay is wrong, even though they believe it to be wrong. My point is that private property and public policy are two different things.

I don't believe that America is perfect or that it's leaders are perfect, either. I do believe that the Constitution and American legal precedent is better than pretty much any system in the rest of the world. No system will be perfect and make everyone happy, but America's system allows ideas to be entertained and believed, and feelings felt, even if it is against someone else's moral judgment. The same cannot be said for many other nations in the world.

[Daniel]

Hey simple man- if you had any manners, you would keep your johnny-one-note drum beat about property rights on the thread where it is currently being discussed. Manners mean that one is interested in what another person is saying, and not merely using their concerns as a platform for one's own.

[BrentRichards]

As for transgender persons being sent to their anatomical or original gender prison, what are the courts supposed to do? What if I got convicted of murder and I decided that I could dress up like a woman for court and then get sent to a women's prison? That wouldn't be right. The courts have to base their decisions on something and frankly allowing people to choose their own gender in terms of prison sentence can lead to tons more corruption of the judicial system.

Just a guess, you don't know any transgender people, do you? Your "dress up like a woman" assessment is more than a little simplistic.

[BrentRichards]

Please forgive my manners, Troy! Welcome, and thank you for your beautiful writing ... that was way more important than my previous post, and should have come first. Mother taught me better.

[Jamie McDaniel]

As for transgender persons being sent to their anatomical or original gender prison, what are the courts supposed to do? What if I got convicted of murder and I decided that I could dress up like a woman for court and then get sent to a women's prison? That wouldn't be right. The courts have to base their decisions on something and frankly allowing people to choose their own gender in terms of prison sentence can lead to tons more corruption of the judicial system.

These forums are a safe place for transgender people and comments like these will not be allowed. While ignorance of the struggles of transgender persons is still widespread, such ignorance does not give one permission to be grossly irresponsible with their words.

Simpleman, a simple evaluation by a medical professional knowledgeable on transgender issues would put a stop to your attempt at getting into a woman's prison by changing into traditional women's attire. And in the future, choose a word other than "murderer" when proposing hypothetical situations concerning a group of people you don't understand.

[Daniel]

Anthony- Very cool.

A picture really is worth a thousand words. And the words were brilliant.

(How'd he do that?)

[simpleman]

I'm not in opposition to any kind of civil disobedience, or non-violent resistance to unjust laws. I'm not saying that SoulForce is useless and should just disband and all of you should forget about your cause. SoulForce should be focused on what it considers unjust laws, such as the numerous laws that deny gays civil unions. Then I would believe that Dr. King and Gandhi's methods are being properly applied. I assume SoulForce is working for these things, using said methods.

I realize that the comment about transgender people in the courts was insensitive and disrespectful. I should have been much more tactful in that comment, and slipping it in that way was underhanded and rude.

All I was really trying to do was explain how that situation would make an altogether very complicated situation that much more complicated. If a judge and jury has to rely on the the self-identified gender of a person, then they have to basically trust what the transgendered person believes about emself, rather than any kind of objective measure. Prisons are separated by sex, not necessarily gender, so they have to decide which prison to send a person to somehow, and public records, i.e. a birth certificate would indicate the original anatomical sex of a person. The determination of where a person goes to prison is based on anatomical sex, not self-identified gender. If you want to fight for a distinction between the two in law with respect to prison sentencing, that would be, by my previous definition, a just cause. Go for it, but don't try to tell Christian colleges that they have to allow an anatomical man to live in women's dormitories, or vice versa.

Some people like to sit on the fence about the issue of LGBT rights. I know that your MO at SoulForce is to force someone on one side or the other, because to you, anyone who isn't with you, i.e. anyone on the fence, is against LGBT rights. In many ways, I myself want to ride that fence. I don't want to be a "supporter" of something I find morally wrong, but I want to respect your rights to your own beliefs, basically your right to own who you are. In other words I won't tell you you have to be straight, but I'm not going to tell a Christian college's leaders that they have to give up what they believe, either. I want to support Christian colleges' rights to craft policies based on their own beliefs. All I'm asking is that you respect others' right to ride the fence, or oppose you, on their property. I don't want you to give up on your goals, but set goals that you can accomplish within the law, not just the goal of trying to end all hate, because that won't happen.

[ladyinred]

My question is why hate? I think the motive of Soul force is to point out that discrimination isn't justified on the basis of religious beliefs.Yes you might have the right to your personal views, but it doesn't justify hatred and violence toward people you tend to disagree with. Besides Soul Force isn't asking people to convert to homosexuality or to stop being heterosexual ,or stop having families, or to stop going to church or reading the bible. but the fact is there is an agenda on the religious right's part mainly to undermine the rights and equality of LGBT people to the point of not letting the hate crimes bill be passed. Is there any justification to that? Isn't violence and hate toward anyone unjustified especially if it leads to criminal activities like assault or even murder?

The constitution does state equal protection under the law. If we allowed people just to do what they want and act on violent or murderous impulses our society would disolve in to an anarchy and no one would be safe. Suppose because of your religious convictions you thought that jewish people, not being Christian are all going to hell if they don't convert to Christianity? Would it give you the right to violate that person on the basis of what you believe, to harm that person?Not everyone shares your views of Christianity either.And just because you think they are going to hell because they don't share your views of Christianity, doesn't make it so in their minds.
Does it give people in the Christian community the right to discriminate against jewish people, moslems, hindus or others because they don't share their biblical views? Where do we draw the line then?

[glbt_equality]

To al those gentle souls who have responded to my original posting - I thank you for your kind, generous and hopeful comments. It takes a calm courage to stand up for what is right, and I encourage you to keep up the good fight. We can all take part in our own "Equality Rides" by no longer remaining silent during our daily activities....

One woman I met told me a story about her family standing around her dying father in the hospital. Her family had long been prejudicial against gays, a topic on which she had always remained silent, even though she knew her own son to be gay. During a "break," she was standing out in the hallway when her sister launched into another tirade about how the gays were responsible for all the evils in the world. She stopped her in mid sentence, saying, “I just want you to know when you talk about gays, you’re talking about my son.” Her sister shut up immediately, and didn’t say anything further until the following day, when she promised, “I will never say another bad word about gays. Your son is part of my family, and I support him in everything he does. From now on, I promise to think about what I say before I say it, and to speak up if anyone around me speaks with hate in their heart. Please forgive me.”

And so, through one simple act of breaking the silence, one family started to heal after suffering years of prejudice that had been tearing it apart from the inside.

Our nation is similarly a family, and we heal not through grand speeches and edicts, but one person at a time.

To “simpleman,” I can only say that I doubt your opinions will be changed here. Anytime someone tells me that the fundamental human right is to hate, and that the rights to exist peacefully are “special” rights that I’m trying to create… then I must recognize that your purpose here is likely based on fear and a "disconnect" with a part of your own humanity. I can only suggest that you search your own heart for a kinder approach.

[ladyinred]

All I have to say is Soul Force, keep on truckin' .

[Emproph]

As for transgender persons being sent to their anatomical or original gender prison, what are the courts supposed to do? What if I got convicted of murder and I decided that I could dress up like a woman for court and then get sent to a women's prison? That wouldn't be right. The courts have to base their decisions on something and frankly allowing people to choose their own gender in terms of prison sentence can lead to tons more corruption of the judicial system.

Is this the best you can do to link transgenderism with a sin that hurts others – whether or not they went to a male or a female prison?

Pathetic.
pathetic >adjective 1 arousing pity. 2 informal miserably inadequate

Do you simpleman, find it to be an option to decide what your gender is? If not, how is it that you feel you are in a position to speak for those of us that do?
Some people like to sit on the fence about the issue of LGBT rights. I know that your MO at SoulForce is to force someone on one side or the otherThat's called psychological projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection). It's a defense mechanism.

I project, we all project. What's important is knowing so about ourselves. MO, or Modus operandi, in relation to Soulforce principles is not fair. You can accuse individuals of having an MO, but it is NOT fair to say that "Soulforce" -- in and of itself -- is an MO as though there is some dishonest secretive ulterior motive. It's not only not fair, it's oxymoronic.

If this is what you believe, then it is a serious charge and must be expressed AS SUCH.

If such a serious charge is what you believe then I am with you on the dishonesty factor, but in order to come to terms with this, I need to know that this is exactly what you are talking about.

What evidence do you have of Soulforce dishonesty that is your concern, perceived or otherwise?

All I'm saying is that if you are going to make such egregious charges, please be specific about them.

[u-dog]

...do so many cool people lives so far away from me? :confused:

To “simpleman,” I can only say that I doubt your opinions will be changed here. Anytime someone tells me that the fundamental human right is to hate, and that the rights to exist peacefully are “special” rights that I’m trying to create… then I must recognize that your purpose here is likely based on fear and a "disconnect" with a part of your own humanity. I can only suggest that you search your own heart for a kinder approach.

I am seized by an overwhelming desire to hug you close Troy !! You are a mature and gentle spirit. since I find that I CAN'T wish that I was in Tyler, Texas, I wish YOU were closer to here. Peace brother. :love:

[Daniel]

Our nation is similarly a family, and we heal not through grand speeches and edicts, but one person at a time.

To “simpleman,” I can only say that I doubt your opinions will be changed here. Anytime someone tells me that the fundamental human right is to hate, and that the rights to exist peacefully are “special” rights that I’m trying to create… then I must recognize that your purpose here is likely based on fear and a "disconnect" with a part of your own humanity. I can only suggest that you search your own heart for a kinder approach.

Well spoke.....well spoke. :love:

I'm not in opposition to any kind of civil disobedience, or non-violent resistance to unjust laws. I'm not saying that SoulForce is useless and should just disband and all of you should forget about your cause. SoulForce should be focused on what it considers unjust laws, such as the numerous laws that deny gays civil unions. Then I would believe that Dr. King and Gandhi's methods are being properly applied. I assume SoulForce is working for these things, using said methods.

Simpleman- I'm afraid you don't exhibit an understanding of nonviolence, the methods of nonviolence or the work and writings of boh Gandhi and King. Both gentlemen used methods of nonviolence to confront bigotry and prejudice- not merely unjust laws. Rose Parks sat in the front of the bus, not because of some law that said she had to sit in the back. Prejudice mandated that black folks should sit in the back of the bus, just like prejudice and homophobia mandate that gay folks should not be allowed to marry.

[Zerbie]

...do so many cool people lives so far away from me? :confused:


I am seized by an overwhelming desire to hug you close Troy !! You are a mature and gentle spirit. since I find that I CAN'T wish that I was in Tyler, Texas, I wish YOU were closer to here. Peace brother. :love:

I feel that same way reading Troy's words.

Troy: I would love to hug you right now. You have a very beautiful heart. I love you and wish you well.

:love: :pray: :dove:

[BrentRichards]

I feel that same way reading Troy's words.

Troy: I would love to hug you right now. You have a very beautiful heart. I love you and wish you well.

:love: :pray: :dove:

Ok, you two, get in line. No pushing. Everybody will get to hug Troy in turn.

[glbt_equality]

since I find that I CAN'T wish that I was in Tyler, Texas, I wish YOU were closer to here. Peace brother. :love:

Ah, yes, Tyler.... while I'm not sure where "here" is, it is undoubtedly more liberal than East Texas! I can think of few places on the planet quite as ripe for change as my current home state!

Thanks for the kind words - and I wish you the best.

[glbt_equality]

Now, y'all are making me blush.

It would be really wonderful to meet everyone. If they have another Equality Ride next year, I was thinking about asking whether they'd take along an old person like me. :)

In the meantime, I'm happy to have available these forums, where I get to (at least virtually) meet such cool people as I've met here.

[BrentRichards]

Now, y'all are making me blush.

It would be really wonderful to meet everyone. If they have another Equality Ride next year, I was thinking about asking whether they'd take along an old person like me. :)

In the meantime, I'm happy to have available these forums, where I get to (at least virtually) meet such cool people as I've met here.

Both years, there have been some older-than-college-age folks on the Ride. That has gone from under-30's but out of college up to all of us "can barely remember college anymore" agers. I don't think there's a limit ... I had a wonderful conversation with Dean Genth on the East bus while they were at Messiah ... Dean, like us, is "over 30" (which counts as cussing in a gay bar) and seems to have had a wonderful experience. You might e-mail him ... all the riders have emails listed here on the site. Also, Kara, who is active in these forums, was on last year's Ride and would likely have some perspective on us "non-spring-chickens" participating. (I say us, I'd love to, but it wouldn't be practically possible any time soon.)

[Simon]

My question is why hate? I think the motive of Soul force is to point out that discrimination isn't justified on the basis of religious beliefs.Yes you might have the right to your personal views, but it doesn't justify hatred and violence toward people you tend to disagree with. Besides Soul Force isn't asking people to convert to homosexuality or to stop being heterosexual ,or stop having families, or to stop going to church or reading the bible. but the fact is there is an agenda on the religious right's part mainly to undermine the rights and equality of LGBT people to the point of not letting the hate crimes bill be passed. Is there any justification to that? Isn't violence and hate toward anyone unjustified especially if it leads to criminal activities like assault or even murder?

The constitution does state equal protection under the law. If we allowed people just to do what they want and act on violent or murderous impulses our society would disolve in to an anarchy and no one would be safe. Suppose because of your religious convictions you thought that jewish people, not being Christian are all going to hell if they don't convert to Christianity? Would it give you the right to violate that person on the basis of what you believe, to harm that person?Not everyone shares your views of Christianity either.And just because you think they are going to hell because they don't share your views of Christianity, doesn't make it so in their minds.
Does it give people in the Christian community the right to discriminate against jewish people, moslems, hindus or others because they don't share their biblical views? Where do we draw the line then?

Ladyinred,

I would like to know how come you came to conclusion that Christians who believe that homosexuality is a sin just like they believe that all other religions, like Buddhism and Islam are false that will lead people to hell, are actually physically harming these people, and even advocated violence against them?

Do you believe that when Christian pastors openly tell that the only true faith is Christianity and those who don't believe in Jesus, will go to hell, they are discriminating against them? As far as I'm concerned, ever person is guaranteed a right saying that his or her religion, whether it's Christianity, Islam, or whatchadingy is the only truth and everybody else is wrong, under the provisions of the First Amendment.

S.

[Montanna]

Ladyinred,

I would like to know how come you came to conclusion that Christians who believe that homosexuality is a sin just like they believe that all other religions, like Buddhism and Islam are false that will lead people to hell, are actually physically harming these people, and even advocated violence against them?

Do you believe that when Christian pastors openly tell that the only true faith is Christianity and those who don't believe in Jesus, will go to hell, they are discriminating against them? As far as I'm concerned, ever person is guaranteed a right saying that his or her religion, whether it's Christianity, Islam, or whatchadingy is the only truth and everybody else is wrong, under the provisions of the First Amendment.

S.

At the age of 12, I attended a friends church and we went to Sunday School together. The teacher there took great pains to tell me that her church's beliefs and ways of doing things were the only way to go to heaven. It caused me a great deal of anguish and fear because I had been brought up to believe that my church's beliefs were the only way to get to heaven and please God. Looking back now, I believe that people are brought to God in different ways. I don't think any religion can decide that God will not accept a person's worship. That is strickly between the individual and God. I believe that the Holy Spirit leads and teaches us on an individual, daily basis. For me, a church is there to promote spiritual growth not set standards for others. We do too much spiritual violence to others when judge their worthiness. It is not our job.

Freedom of speech is a human convention that allows us to communicate in order to discover things (what we believe, about each other, etc.). It let's us be honest about our feelings. So right now we are moving toward how our speech affects others. Instead of limiting free speech, we need to talk it out, like we are doing here. Montanna

[pnggrad79]

I was watching The Biggest Loser on TV today with my wife, and their theme song is a song I love from the Queer As Folk CD called, "Proud" and it sums up how I feel about the Equality Riders. The song says, "You could be so many people, just make that break for freedom, what have you done today to make you feel proud?" I have so much respect for people who lay it all on the line to go out there and say what needs to be said in the name of equality. When you engage in dialogue with prejudiced people consumed by hatred, you challenge their ignorance. Yes, it may be uncomfortable for them, but they are the cowards. Cowardice is like hiding in a corner, somehow comfortable in their uncomfortableness. The Equality Riders challenged long held beliefs that still have a strong grip on this country and until more people stand up for equality, we won't see it. I applaud them :applause: :applause: :applause: They can go to bed tonight singing that song. They have done something they can be proud of. :rainbow:

[glbt_equality]

I would like to know how come you came to conclusion that Christians who believe that homosexuality is a sin just like they believe that all other religions, like Buddhism and Islam are false that will lead people to hell, are actually physically harming these people, and even advocated violence against them?

Do you believe that when Christian pastors openly tell that the only true faith is Christianity and those who don't believe in Jesus, will go to hell, they are discriminating against them? As far as I'm concerned, ever person is guaranteed a right saying that his or her religion, whether it's Christianity, Islam, or whatchadingy is the only truth and everybody else is wrong, under the provisions of the First Amendment.

S.

Simon, no one is trying to abridge your First Ammendment rights. There are those of us on the Soulforce website, however, who would ask you, as a Christian, to consider the spiritual violence you may manifest with some of your language. Would you, for example, tell your own son he was going to hell if you found out he was gay? ... and how would you feel if you later discovered that someone you had used this kind of language on had committed suicide?

While the First Ammendment protects our freedom of speech, it does not protect those of us irresponsible enough to use that liberty to... incite a riot, for example... or to otherwise encourage violence. Some of the more extreme hate language from our Christian leadership borders on such "violence-inciting" language. Take the following excerpt from Dobson's "Focus on the Family" website, and see if you can understand how such language might encourage actual physical, deadly violence against the GLBT community:

“Just as the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 by the Empire of Japan served to energize and mobilize the armed forces of America, it would appear that the vicious assault on marriage and the church in recent months has begun to re-invigorate people of faith. I see indications that the church is mobilizing its forces to meet the challenge. Evil has a way of overreaching, and that appears to have happened regarding the blatant, lawless attack on marriage and biblical morality.”

Still, you should understand that we're not trying to make such speech illegal, even though many documented hate crimes are, by admission of their perpetrators, encouraged by hateful rhetoric communicated by religious leaders. Instead, we are simply using our own First Ammendment freedoms to ask Christian leaders to consider "toning down" such inflammatory language, which may be considered by congregants as a call to violence.

[Simon]

Simon, no one is trying to abridge your First Ammendment rights. There are those of us on the Soulforce website, however, who would ask you, as a Christian, to consider the spiritual violence you may manifest with some of your language. Would you, for example, tell your own son he was going to hell if you found out he was gay? ... and how would you feel if you later discovered that someone you had used this kind of language on had committed suicide?

While the First Ammendment protects our freedom of speech, it does not protect those of us irresponsible enough to use that liberty to... incite a riot, for example... or to otherwise encourage violence. Some of the more extreme hate language from our Christian leadership borders on such "violence-inciting" language. Take the following excerpt from Dobson's "Focus on the Family" website, and see if you can understand how such language might encourage actual physical, deadly violence against the GLBT community:

“Just as the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 by the Empire of Japan served to energize and mobilize the armed forces of America, it would appear that the vicious assault on marriage and the church in recent months has begun to re-invigorate people of faith. I see indications that the church is mobilizing its forces to meet the challenge. Evil has a way of overreaching, and that appears to have happened regarding the blatant, lawless attack on marriage and biblical morality.”

Still, you should understand that we're not trying to make such speech illegal, even though many documented hate crimes are, by admission of their perpetrators, encouraged by hateful rhetoric communicated by religious leaders. Instead, we are simply using our own First Ammendment freedoms to ask Christian leaders to consider "toning down" such inflammatory language, which may be considered by congregants as a call to violence.

Troy,

I don't advocate violence against anybody. But I truly believe in the freedom of thought. That means that I fully support that any person living on this earth to openly express that his or her belief system is the only truth for him of for her. I also encourage mutual respect among people whose beliefs are different. So, I guess I'm with you on "toning down" harsh language. There is a way how to express disagreement without sounding disrespectful.

I understand that Christian Right uses a very strong language but the problem is that they are not the only ones. A number of conservative gays use the same language in order to criticize liberal lobbies for promoting "political correctness." For instance, Tammy Bruce has called liberal gay activists a gay gestapo. A month ago, I heard that Andrew Sullivan was defending Catholic adoption agencies' right to deny adoption to same-sex couples, because of their religious beliefs. By looking at this whole, I started thinking that maybe it's not about heterosexuality vs. homosexuality, but maybe about democracy vs. censorship and maybe not about gays vs. straights, or Christians vs. non-Christians, but about conservatives vs. liberals? I came to a conclusion that our world is much bigger than we could have ever think of.

For what it's worth: I suggest you check this (www.themarinfoundation.org)

[antonyh]

Troy,

I don't advocate violence against anybody. But I truly believe in the freedom of thought. That means that I fully support that any person living on this earth to openly express that his or her belief system is the only truth for him of for her. I also encourage mutual respect among people whose beliefs are different. So, I guess I'm with you on "toning down" harsh language. There is a way how to express disagreement without sounding disrespectful.

I understand that Christian Right uses a very strong language but the problem is that they are not the only ones. A number of conservative gays use the same language in order to criticize liberal lobbies for promoting "political correctness." For instance, Tammy Bruce has called liberal gay activists a gay gestapo. A month ago, I heard that Andrew Sullivan was defending Catholic adoption agencies' right to deny adoption to same-sex couples, because of their religious beliefs. By looking at this whole, I started thinking that maybe it's not about heterosexuality vs. homosexuality, but maybe about democracy vs. censorship and maybe not about gays vs. straights, or Christians vs. non-Christians, but about conservatives vs. liberals? I came to a conclusion that our world is much bigger than we could have ever think of.

For what it's worth: I suggest you check this (www.themarinfoundation.org)

Or maybe it is about giving everyone a place at the table vs. keeping the table the exclusive property of the privileged.

[revtj]

I would like to know exactly what the Marin Foundation's religious perspective is on homosexuality. I went to the website as referenced and it seemed very pseudo-intellectual, with a lot of words but no positions articulated.

Then I saw Moody Bible Institute in the biography of a staff member. Soulforce Chicago has reported before that MBI students can take a class in which they go to Boyztown/Halstead bars to "interview" gay people as a part of "missions" training.

Is Marin associated with this kind of religious mission?

[Simon]

I would like to know exactly what the Marin Foundation's religious perspective is on homosexuality. I went to the website as referenced and it seemed very pseudo-intellectual, with a lot of words but no positions articulated.

Then I saw Moody Bible Institute in the biography of a staff member. Soulforce Chicago has reported before that MBI students can take a class in which they go to Boyztown/Halstead bars to "interview" gay people as a part of "missions" training.

Is Marin associated with this kind of religious mission?

Hi TJ,

The Marin Foundation about who they are and what they believe was discussed here:
http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2634

No, their mission is not religious, but rather to enhance a community outreach between conservative Christians and gay people.