Are you really wanting a dialogue?

[Peter Z]

Please be honest about your intentions of only wanting a media platform:

Dr. Paul Conn has been in regular contact with the directors of Equality Ride since the time they stated their intention in mid-January to visit Lee University. The group asked for access to classes, chapel, open forums, and an evening concert on campus by what it bills as "a gay Christian singing duo," none of which were acceptable on the Lee campus, Conn said. He takes issue with the group's claim that they want dialogue, saying he offered a private meeting with Lee administrators and an opportunity for public debate. "There is no commitment to dialogue by this group," he said, "they only want to deliver their point of view."

[Jamie McDaniel]

What GLBT people want is equality, Peter.

Dialogue, connecting with people who need to see our faces, distributing educational resources, and getting the media to carry our demand for justice -- these are all part of using nonviolent methods to bring about positive social change.

[Peter Z]

Allow me to state upfront that I think it is a shame that GLBT people have been victimized with hate-crimes. There is no place for that in a pluralistic society (or any society for that matter). With that said...

With the expection of same-sex marriage, where is your equality being oppressed? (Please, no rhetoric!) Because you cannot attend a university like Lee or Liberty? I ask, why would an openly GLBT want to attend these universities? You would only be inviting ridicule and condemnation. It is like you are picking a fight to show how oppressed you are.

[keltic63]

Allow me to state upfront that I think it is a shame that GLBT people have been victimized with hate-crimes. There is no place for that in a pluralistic society (or any society for that matter). With that said...

With the expection of same-sex marriage, where is your equality being oppressed? (Please, no rhetoric!) Because you cannot attend a university like Lee or Liberty? I ask, why would an openly GLBT want to attend these universities? You would only be inviting ridicule and condemnation. It is like you are picking a fight to show how oppressed you are.

Because ridicule and condemnation are not of God; those who show this to glbt people lack a basic understanding of God's love, as well as the great commandment. It has already been demonstrated that there are students attending these universities who are glbt. Would you invite them to leave? Your statement demonstrates that you know these colleges are behaving inappropriately toward glbt students. could it be your resentment of the equality ride is because they threaten to expose the shameful discriminating policies of those universities?

[NathanATX]

Allow me to state upfront that I think it is a shame that GLBT people have been victimized with hate-crimes. There is no place for that in a pluralistic society (or any society for that matter). With that said...

With the expection of same-sex marriage, where is your equality being oppressed? (Please, no rhetoric!) Because you cannot attend a university like Lee or Liberty? I ask, why would an openly GLBT want to attend these universities? You would only be inviting ridicule and condemnation. It is like you are picking a fight to show how oppressed you are.

We are standing up for our human dignity and the inalienable rights that are guaranteed us by the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, but denied us by extremists.

Though some states offer various protections, on a national level:

We are denied the right to marry and the hundreds if not thousands of rights & responsibilities that come with marriage.

We are denied the right to adopt & foster children.

We are denied protection from employment discrimination.

We are denied the protection afforded by hate crime legislation.

We are denied protection from housing discrimination.

And yes, we are denied protection from educational institution discrimination.

[NathanATX]

I decided to go to ORU because I absolutely loved the school. Was it going to be a risk? Most certainly. I would have to outsmart the idiotic homophobes for four years.

But, I felt that's where God was leading me.

Why do I have to suffer the potential harm of the ORU gestapo simply because I'm a gay christian? If I were a black christian, such treatment would not be tolerated.

[Emproph]

{I wrote this to my mother in an e-mail before inviting her to a PFLAG meeting, she’s catholic, and she is coming with, fortunately delightedly}

Peter, Imagine for a moment that for all of your life you were told that your love for another was nothing more than a chosen sexual behavior. And in response to your clarification that it was indeed love and you didn't choose it, you were then dismissed as being too stupid to realize that you were actually attracted to the opposite sex, but just don't realize it because delusion is both the cause and effect of your "chosen" condition.

If you consider yourself a Christian, that's just more proof of how delusional you are, because if you were a true Christian you'd be fully heterosexual. Throw in the "facts" that your perversion makes you a child molester, and your taking offense to being construed as perverted is an attack on Christianity and religious freedom and that you are also therefore a hypocrite for wanting to be tolerated but not wanting to tolerate being called perverted. And you're not understanding that you're perverted is portrayed as just further evidence of how delusional you really are.

Then imagine having all of the results of such oppression thrown back in your face and used as further proof of how perverted you really are. Your "chosen" perversion leads to drug addiction/alcoholism. You're not allowed to get married so you're also promiscuous. Being suicidal or actually committing suicide is also blamed on your 'lifestyle choice.' Then imagine that all of these messages are also packaged as "Telling the Truth in Love," and if you don't accept all that "truth in love" you're going to burn in hell forever.

Imagine that your fight to secure the freedom to disagree with that definition of perversion (inferiority), is construed as attacking “religious freedom” through the use of “activist judges” with the “agenda” to “impose your beliefs on society” (to exist).

Then marinade all of that with the constant drilling that you are an "abomination" of creation in eyes of God. Imagine that all those making the claim that you "chose" this by going out of your way to embrace the most revolting thing imaginable also claim to have "chosen" their sexual orientation by doing absolutely NOTHING AT ALL (Jerry Falwell and Joyce Meyer - Chris Mathews and Larry King respectively). All in the name of all that is Good and Holy and True, God and Jesus. Imagine that and perhaps you can begin to understand where the feeling of oppression is coming from. (end of e-mail)

Have you been the first one to walk in on the bloody suicide of someone you love? would the note explaining his turmoil over being unchangeably gay be something you would consider to be “picking a fight to show how oppressed he was?” Would you take comfort in knowing you were biblically correct? That happens EVERY DAY. Sometimes without notes, and A-LOT MESSIER. Fathom it.

What kind of a Christian response to information of that caliber is defeating and repealing hate crime laws because they are “an attack on your religious freedom?” Or blaming the “gay agenda” for skewing studies and statistics as though no record of suicides and hate crimes equals no argument for protection. Does that sound like a Christian response to you? Are you aware of this?

And freedom to do what? They’ve already mastered the art of getting the “enemy” (those too delusional to know they are deluded) to kill themselves! The only “freedom” of religion I see in that context is the freedom to oppress with impunity in the name of Jesus! I don't see anything that could possibly be more perverted and disgusting that that.

So please, for my sake and others wounded like me, show us what it is that you and those you know are not seeing that we are seeing, because SOMETHING is NOT making sense, and people are being BADLY BADLY HURT everyday because of it.

[Zerbie]

Still reeling from Emproph's words. Wow. Nothing to add on to that. Just, yeah, that IS what it's like.

Where is equality being oppressed? You've gotten a lot of powerful answers already.

I could tell you dozens of stories - could fill a book with things that have been done to those around me, and some few that were done to me specifically, or that I witnessed.

Just a couple:

In the late 90s, for reasons I've long since forgotten, I let a doctor know I was involved in gay rights activism. Soon as I was out of the exam room he told his entire office staff that I was molesting children. I found out that he said this because one of his staff quit her job shortly thereafter and phoned me up to tell me about it. I'm glad she did, I never went back to that doctor. To this day, I am afraid of health care practitioners finding out about my involvement in activism, lest they should assume I am a criminal or something - and how might their attitude, if so, affect the care they give me?

Around the same time, a landlord from whom I was renting a garage apartment entered the apartment unexpectedly and found newsletters/print materials, etc. that indicated my involvement in gay rights activism. He threw me out immediately, in fact stood over me while I loaded my stuff into my car, staring hatefully the entire time. Perhaps he found my "sexual behavior" to be "immoral." Funny - I didn't know there was anything immoral about being a virgin. There was no place for me to go, and I didn't know what to do or where. Spent the night sobbing over the steering wheel. I contemplated suicide for weeks, interpreting the landlord's action as a sign that God did not want me to live. Somehow I managed to squeak through and survive - but my intense fear of being homeless and having to live in the car again (or worse, maybe on the street next time) did not dissolve until we bought our own house last year.

Ironically, I was involved in activism in hope of preventing these sorts of things happening to others. Not only did I not protect others from similar events, but I couldn't even defend myself when they happened to me. There was no anti-discrimination law (and in fact, there STILL isn't) so I didn't even have a right to sue the landlord for breaking the lease agreement (assuming I had $ for a lawyer, which being a student with about $400 in life-savings, I couldn't afford.) And in both cases, the doctor and the landlord, they acted out of a set of illogical assumptions about me, my worthiness, my values and morality, and presumably about my sexual behavior, all because they found out I was a little involved in activism.

[Peter Z]

your love for another was nothing more than a chosen sexual behavior.

My love for my wife is a chosen sexual behavior/emotion. I chose her, I choose her today, and I will continue to choose her.

Then marinade all of that with the constant drilling that you are an "abomination" of creation in eyes of God

I have never said this or thought this. You are created in the image of God. But, you were born an enemy of God and so was I! That image has been disfigured and is in need of restoral. That is what redemption is all about. We have ALL sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Christ's work on the cross provides the restoration that we all need.

So please, for my sake and others wounded like me, show us what it is that you and those you know are not seeing that we are seeing, because SOMETHING is NOT making sense, and people are being BADLY BADLY HURT everyday because of it.

One of my favorite authors/theologians is a man named Henri Nouwen. Nouwen recalls having homosexual tendencies as early as six years old. This is about the same time that he felt an overwhelming call to the ministry. From my research, I don't think that Nouwen ever acted on his homosexual desires. But, you can see his hurt throughout his writings, especially a book like The Wounded Healer. I would suggest reading some of his material.

I am sorry that you have been wounded. I cannot pretend to understand the struggle you deal with everyday. But, I do understand a little about redemption. I understand that Christ can make us a "new Creation." I understand that God is not the author of confusion. I understand that Jesus has promised us life and life to the full. You say that you believe in God and His son, Jesus Christ. I can accept that. You say that you were born this way. I can accept that we are all born into sin. You say that the Lord accepts you just the way you are. I can accept that, too. He accepts me just the way I am but he doesn't expect me to stay this way. The Lord expects me to grow more like Him everyday. I would like to say that I am doing the best that I can, but I fail. And when I fail I go to the cross. At the cross is where He makes all things new. He brings clarity to my confusion, hope for my life and restoration for my soul. I am not judging anyone on this board. I know that I am coming across as "just one more so-called Christian trying to turn you straight." I assure you that is not my intention. My intention is to get you to consider whether you might be wrong. I wrote this elsewhere and was challenged that I have not considered if I am wrong. Well, whoever wrote that did not read my entire statement. If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose. It would not affect my view of God, my relationship with my family, or my ministry. I just happen to believe Jesus when He says "narrow is the way." You can call me narrow minded all day long, but I'd be careful doing that with Jesus. Call me a right-wing (which I'm not!!!) evangelical (also not!!!) fundamentalist (definitely NOT!!!) for trying to have an orthodox hermeneutic of Scripture.


To NathanATX

We are denied the right to marry and the hundreds if not thousands of rights & responsibilities that come with marriage.

We are denied the right to adopt & foster children.

We are denied protection from employment discrimination.

We are denied the protection afforded by hate crime legislation.

We are denied protection from housing discrimination.

And yes, we are denied protection from educational institution discrimination.

Marriage - true, I actually do not have a problem with a civil same sex marriage. I personally think that any marriage outside of the church is not ordained of God. I also believe that someone like JLo or Liz Taylor have done much more harm to the institute of marriage than any loving same sex couple. But, name the rights and responsibilities you are losing. I am not aware of any additional rights that I have being married. Joint filing of taxes? Not a big deal. Hospital visitation rights? Just get on your story on CNN and you'll be fine.

Adoption/Foster Care - I have to agree with the mainstream here. Sorry. Children need a male and female influence in the home. Studies bear this out.

Employment - Depends on what kind of employment you are talking about. If you want to be the Youth MInister in a Baptist church then you should expect that you aren't going to get the job or will get fired if found out. That's common sense.

Hate Crime Legislation - You are afforded protection.

Housing Discrimination - If you are talking about renting I would have to say that it is unfortunate, but people have the right to rent their homes/apartments to who they wish. The free society goes both ways. If you are talking about buying you may have an argument. I am not sure of lending policies to non-married mortgagees.

Education - You can attend any public university you wish. Private schools should be allowed to decide who they want as their student body. Male, female, black, white, hispanic, straight, glbt, etc. You will respond that this should affect public assistance at these schools. Maybe you're right.

[revtj]

One of my favorite authors/theologians is a man named Henri Nouwen. Nouwen recalls having homosexual tendencies as early as six years old. This is about the same time that he felt an overwhelming call to the ministry. From my research, I don't think that Nouwen ever acted on his homosexual desires. But, you can see his hurt throughout his writings, especially a book like The Wounded Healer. I would suggest reading some of his material.


I believe Nouwen did act on his feelings. He was forced to be discrete and all evidence of his relationships are carried in the hearts and memories of those who knew him personally. (Source: Chris Glaser, student of Nouwen and author of Uncommon Calling - A Gay Christian’s Struggle to Serve the Church )


Can you see that it is grossly unfair to force a great spiritual leader like Nouwen to live in fear and extreme privacy when, if he had been str8, he could've been thrice divorced and remarried, had affairs with 5 floozies and everyone would've treated him like normal?

[Peter Z]

I find it interesting that his call to priesthood (and with it celibacy) occurs around the same time as his feelings of homosexuality. He suppressed his feelings whether gay or straight.

[revtj]

If he supressed his feelings it was because people like you had power over him, power enough to destroy all the good he did.

[Peter Z]

And, he was a better priest, teacher, author because of it. And don't use the "people like you" statement. That is hate speech and you should know better!

[revtj]

That is what I meant.

You are trying to define a dead gay christian man's lfe by your homophobia. For me, as a gay chaplain for whom Nouwen is a door-opener and hero, that's gaybashing.

If I were a str8 christian the Soulforce website would be alot like playing golf is to me as an effeminate gay man. It would bore the living daylights out of me.

Why are you gnawing on this bone, ranting and raving? You know where we stand, we know where you stand. You offered to exit 3 posts ago. What is it that you can't let go of???

[Joe Brummer]

To PeterZ
I think your views on same sex marriage and gays are in line with MLK's philopsophy of the beloved commuinity, where we may not all agree with each other, but respect and engage in each other with love....Bravo to you!

There are a few points you have made I feel are not in line with my beliefs, but I don't have time to address them, Sorry, just really busy. I also think you are viewing Soulforce in a shalllow light rather than a big picture, I will try to address this later, but I am pressed by time these days and wanted to give kudos where they are due.....I am happy you see the "beloved community" and are willing to be a part and let GLBT people be a part. That is awesome...I will try and write more later....

[Jamie McDaniel]

I actually do not have a problem with a civil same sex marriage.
Peter, I am glad that you are this far along, but you must understand that we could never ultimately accept such a situation where opposite-gender couples are seen as superior to same-gender couples.

Where would the church be today if the Pharisees (the ones who were part of the early church) had offered the Gentiles second-class citizenship in the church and the Gentiles took it thinking that was a good offer?

[SolInvictus]

Peter Z. - where did you get your data on gay adoption and gay marriage?

To review, here are some facts:

In Massachussets, where gay marriage is legal, the divorce rate went down (not up) & society did not become hedonistic or crazed.

The APA (American Psychological Assoc.) recently did studies along with adoption agencies, and found adopted children of same-sex parents were well adjusted, happy, and did not become "gay" as sexual orientation is not a choice.

Link: http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html

[Peter Z]

You are trying to define a dead gay christian man's lfe by your homophobia. For me, as a gay chaplain for whom Nouwen is a door-opener and hero, that's gaybashing.

I'm not homophobic, I think that has been proven in my posting thus far. Nor am I attempting to bash gays. Nor am I trampling on the grave of Nouwen. It is directly because of the tension in his life that he was able to minister the way he did. I am sorry that you are unable to recognize this.

Nouwen CHOSE to enter a life of priesthood and celibacy from a young age. This was not forced upon him. Yes, he would have had to leave the priesthood if he acted on his pre-disposition to homosexuality and we would have lost an amazing theologian in the process. I think that Nouwen is a prime example of what to do with feelings of attraction toward the same sex. It may be a life of tension, but the Lord's calling is not an easy one. Ever read Jeremiah?

[Shep]

"quote" Adoption/Foster Care - I have to agree with the mainstream here. Sorry. Children need a male and female influence in the home. Studies bear this out.

Peter Z,
I just want to make sure I understand something about the above quote from your comment.
If a heterosexual divorced or widowed person who has children, (either the mother or the father) decides that they want to remain single, should the government give them the following ultimatum: Get married again, or give up the children to the state? Or are you saying that a male and female influence in the home is only necessary in the cases of adoption or foster care?

[revtj]

My dear, I have known a few priests in my day. What they render to Rome and to the Archbishop, and how they conduct their personal lives, is often different. When they attend Mass the morning after, they partake of forgiveness of sin. It's a regular habit for a whole lot of priests.

I am saying to you that I know Nouwen did not agree with the church's official teaching on homosexuality and he had more than once fallen in love. The relationships were honorable and spiritually renewing for him, though they could not last DUE TO THE CHURCH's HOMOPHOBIA.

The fact that he had to hide this and sanitize his writings after death does not make him some kind of cosmic virgin celibate nor an example for all gays in ministry. IT MAKES HIM A VICTIM OF OPPRESSION BY A CORRUPT, HOMOPHOBIC INSTITUTION.

Think what he could have gifted the church with, if like Luther, he could have had his Katharina (Charles?), a male partner like Sts. Sergius & Bacchus!

You want him to be a straight virgin because that's the only way his life is not tainted to you. But he was a man. A man who loved men. A sinner saved by grace and he was less than fulfilled because he could not fully bring to ministry who he really was; what good do closets do the poor, the hungry, the sick & the dying with whom he constantly was in pastoral relationships? Are those relationships tainted if he ever had gay sex?

It's like a reverse madonna/whore complex you're projecting onto gay men.

[Jennifer5]

I have a question on the thing about a male and female influence in the home.... why doesn't it count if a gay couple's female friends are always there helping raise the kids.... when would that sort of situation count as male and female influence?

[Jamie McDaniel]

I think that Nouwen is a prime example of what to do with feelings of attraction toward the same sex.
I think all the same-gender couples who have lived in committed, faithful, loving relationships for 20, 30, 40, and 50 years are prime examples of what to do with feelings of attraction toward the same sex.

And I think all the gay singles who live open and authentic lives are another great example.

[revtj]

I'm not homophobic, I think that has been proven in my posting thus far.

All of us are homophobic, Peter, even gay people. It's not possible to not be homophobic when it's culturally enscribed and re-inforced by government and religion.

I respect your struggle but if we weren't dealing with homophobia gay teen suicide wouldn't exist, Fred Phelps would be irrelevant, and you wouldn't give a rat's rump who Nouwen loved.

Homophobia is the sea we swim in, you & me and all the rest. That's what Soulforce is trying to educate/confront/change.

[Peter Z]

Are you suggesting that it is acceptable for a priest to offer mass on Sunday and be in need of confession the following day whether it is normative or not? Do the Scriptures not exhort us to "be holy as He is holy?" We cannot have it both ways. You have interpreted Nouwen's life through the lens of a homosexual in need of a hero. I interpret Nouwen's through the lens of a wounded prophet who practiced self-denial in order to honor His God. I think that Nouwen could not have cared less about the mandates of the Catholic Church. The church provided him the safety and boundaries that he himself knew he needed.


To the topic of adoption/foster care/divorce etc:

Ideal situations:

#1 - Child in home with both loving biological parents
#2 - Child in home with at least ONE loving biological parent
#3 - Child adopted into home with loving heterosexual couple
#4 - Child raised in caring group home environment (I lived in a group home, so I know what I am talking about here)

[revtj]

I know how I am speaking, I resent the way you put yourself in the final interpreters position. The only thing that's hurting me is your addiction to not listening.

It is not up to me or you to decide if a gay priests' practice of being forgiven of sexual sin the morning after is OK. It is how that particular religious tradition works and it is what a lot of gay priests do because there aren't other dignified choices. It's what the str8 ones do too if it makes you feel any better.

The whole concept of chastity for christian priests came to us from Augustine whose constant prayer was "Lord, give me chastity but not yet." After he was baptised (a political act more so than a religious one) he sent his unnamed woman partner away, and of the son they conceived together, he said, "I had no part in him but the sin." When Adeodatus (meaning gift from God) died inexplicably in young adulthood, Augustine was then cleared to become a bishop. Talk about erotophobia! You cannot build a pure church on fear of sexuality. And they didn't.

I still say you have inverted the Madonna/Whore complex and projected it onto gay men. Do you know what I am talking about?

[Joe Brummer]

PeterZ,
Please atake a moment of your day to visit www.Colage.org

Let the children of gays tell you, how ideal it is....I think you will learn much from the children.

[dewdrop_world]

In any debate, telling the other person what he or she is thinking is almost always a mistake... whether it's "trying to define a dead gay christian man's life by your homophobia" or "a homosexual in need of a hero."

What if it were proven that Nouwen did not practice self-denial? I don't know for sure whether he did or didn't, but I am curious about what people feel they have to lose if the truth is one way or the other.

Peter-- it's pretty rare for the historical record to acknowledge homosexual activities or tendencies openly. Even Walt Whitman's biography is murky, although it's well accepted that he had an awful lot of sex with both men and women. It's equally common, when evidence of so-and-so's homosexuality starts to come to light, for that evidence to be disputed vigorously as many find it difficult to accept a different view of a person's life. A great example, though non-religious, is the now-risible hoo-haw a couple of decades ago when some musicologists started to connect the dots between very intimate, emotional, passionate letters between Schubert and several male "friends" in his circle, and the lyrical quality in his music that is more feminine than Beethoven's over the top masculine hammering. When they offered the hypothesis that maybe Schubert was gay and these letters were to his lover(s), the music history establishment went ballistic. No way could one of the bright lights of the German Romantic tradition be ... that way.

What remains striking is the intensity of the response, as if it were sacrilegious to insinuate, even cautiously, that this paragon of artistic virtue might possibly have been gettin' it on with other guys. They responded as if it were an attack on them. Why? Was it just a matter of protecting Schubert's good name from being tarnished? Exactly how was his reputation being tarnished, anyway? They never could quite say.

It's not a precise parallel to this discussion, but it recalls something we hear a lot in the gay community. Because gay people are "intrinsically disordered," the only way to attain spiritual (or any other kind of) integrity is through self denial. None of that dirty stuff is allowed. Consequently, if someone is gay and does not practice self denial, everything they do is in some way tainted, and not to be trusted. Now, I know that to be nonsense, but it still amazes me how often that trope, that subconscious impression, pops up.

Do you think Nouwen could honor his God without practicing rigorous self denial? If so, how? Is it possible that practicing rigorous self denial could be a way to dishonor God?

hjh

[Peter Z]

I still say you have inverted the Madonna/Whore complex and projected it onto gay men. Do you know what I am talking about?

Feel free to explain. However, I will say this specifically to TJ. While it is difficult to discern "tone" on a website forum, your "tone" towards me seems very hateful. I actually live in Atlanta if you would like to get a cup of coffee sometime so that we are both aware of non-verbal communication.

To Dewdrop:

Do you think Nouwen could honor his God without practicing rigorous self denial? If so, how? Is it possible that practicing rigorous self denial could be a way to dishonor God?

Yes and Yes. Let me start with the second question. Practicing rigorus self-denial is the reason for the Protestant Reformation. Luther simply had enough and stumbled upon the "just shall live by faith." So, your answer to that question is "yes."

As far as Nouwen, yes I think he could have honored God without practicing self-denial, but I do not think he would have been as effective.

Back to TJ:

It is not up to me or you to decide if a gay priests' practice of being forgiven of sexual sin the morning after is OK. It is how that particular religious tradition works and it is what a lot of gay priests do because there aren't other dignified choices. It's what the str8 ones do too if it makes you feel any better.

Religious traditions are not my standard. I am not told to be holy as "X" Christian Community Church is holy. I am told to be an imitator of Christ. Any priest/minister who is engaged in sin needs to step aside from his or her office. And, no, it does not make me feel better that straight ministers fall into sin.

[SolInvictus]

Hmm Peter:

I couldn't help but notice you ignored or did not reply when given proof (the APA) that adopted children of same-sex couples do very well.

[Peter Z]

There are always exceptions and you can make the data suit any agenda (that goes for anyone)...and, that entire line of debate only came up because someone suggested that glbt could NOT adopt children. It sounds as if they can, so that should be removed from a list of inequality.

[SolInvictus]

Some states have been trying to ban gay adoption based on prejudice and misinformation stemming from the "Religious Right."

Considering the data comes from reputable sources, how is it in error? The AMA (Am. Med. Assoc.) and WHO (World Health Organization) agree with the APA.

[awediot]

PeterZ, I first want to say, that even as a gay Christian, I agree with you more than you'd likely expect. I don't see you as homophobic and see you as sincere in your sadness that gays have been treated poorly. I believe you'd accept civil unions for legal reasons and don't care if you think God would be ok with that. I agree private enterprise has the right to choose the type of people it wants to associate with and a loving, straight couple is the best circumstance. -A point you haven't made but may agree with, is that the deep wounds of some gays (which you'll never understand) can sometimes create a forgivable chip on the shoulder and sense that mundane, daily discourtesies or the professional rejections everyone experiences are more personal, homophobic attacks, when the waiter or the boss are jerks to everbody or simply dislike you for other reasons, and gay doesn't even cross their mind.


Now to pounce...I take it (please correct me) that you feel gays, like all others are born into Sin (homosexuality being one of many), and the reparitive power of the cross is there for the asking, and will restore one to either heterosexuality or grant the strength to be celibate. I am unsure if you think it is a choice, but considerring you said:......" My love for my wife is a chosen sexual behavior/emotion. I chose her, I choose her today, and I will continue to choose her." when the subject was broached earlier, I suspect you do. One question, could you simply NOT choose her? (if yes don't tell her that). A choice is different than a preference. You may have preferred someone else who gave you no choice. You may prefer steak, but your host offered only the choice between chicken or hamburger. A preference is out of your control. Choose a different favorite color... Pray to have that different color changed for you. Choose a different God, a different skin... What when you come to the cross, abject, suicidal, stinking of repentence for a thing you've never done, praying again, adding another to years of terrified pleads to be changed, offered to a God who hates you. And he doesn't lift a finger. Just shuts the lid on your only relief, wrecking your hope for death by setting it on fire; and your only 15... It is a brutal, Evil and perfect trap many of us grew up in, and now pray in a way you also will never understand, that no one else go through it.

For myself, screw admission policies, biggotted bosses, closeted, hostile landlords and the crumbling on its own blessing of marriage, but anyone justify that Hell for another innocent child, and God have Mercy on their Soul... I can only warn... You asked what if I were wrong. If I am wrong, then God is of a nature I will gladly burn to stay away from. You said' " If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose. It would not affect my view of God, my relationship with my family, or my ministry." What would it affect when you look away from yourself?

[revtj]

Peter, yes I will be glad to explain it to you although, honestly, it baffles me that you aren't aware of it.

The madonna/whore complex comes out of feminist critique of patriarchy. It is reflected in the attitudes enscribed in culture (receding nowadays in the west, thankfully, but still very much alive in the East and Mideast) that if a woman enjoys sex she is a whore. If she is a good mother and a domestic genius she is a celestial vision. Remember Jesus' mother was declared a perpetual virgin in the middle ages, even though there is no biblical evidence to support it.

The history of artistic depiction of women supports this observation. Women are either portrayed nude or serving dinner. It is something men have projected onto women for 1000s of years.

I sense that you are projecting it onto gay men in that, if Nouwen had a love affair with a guy, his whole life's work is trash, but if he remained celibate he is objectified as the ideal homosexual. There are probably alot of people who feel that way, which is exactly why no trace of his affairs can be found in his work.

Do you know the term subjugated history? It applies here also. It refers to the fact that the victors write history. In this case, Christus Victus, a corrupt and heterosexist church is winning, therefore the stories of gay men like Sts. Sergius and Bacchus are subjugated, buried under homophobic denial such that one would have to dig deep to find them. Until about Stonewall, the only gay history one could find was subjugated.

It seems to annoy you, but we are standing up now and claiming our own: Michelangelo, King David, the Centurion and his slave, Whitman, Schubert, Nouwen, and the list goes on and on. We are also telling our own stories now, refusing to be silenced any longer. That annoys alot of people but we think it's merely seeking justice and it is a sacred duty.

I am no more annoyed with you than you are with me. I sense that your attitude is inflexible and being RIGHT is more important than doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with your God. That, to me, is unhealthy in a minister.

[tdogg]

As far as the Equality Ride objectives - drastic situations call for drastic ideas which create drastic actions. Drastic does not mean violent, hence the non-violent stance the Equality Riders are taking. PeterZ and Venari are just two people giving their own opinions on the Equality Ride objections and actions - 10 different people can experience the same situation or event and come away with 10 different opinions on the experience. From what I am reading, it sounds like many more students are advocating what the Equality Riders are doing, supporting them and wanting to engage in dialogue in a positive way, than the few (two?) who are making negative statements here. I applaud the Riders for standing up for not only their rights, but the rights all of citizens, GLBT and straight. When you get down to the nuts and bolts of it all, it is a fight for equal rights of each and every person in this country. It's just that some currently experience more of those rights than others. Thanks Equality Riders for all that you are doing for all of us!

[NathanATX]

To NathanATX

Marriage - true, I actually do not have a problem with a civil same sex marriage. I personally think that any marriage outside of the church is not ordained of God. I also believe that someone like JLo or Liz Taylor have done much more harm to the institute of marriage than any loving same sex couple. But, name the rights and responsibilities you are losing. I am not aware of any additional rights that I have being married. Joint filing of taxes? Not a big deal. Hospital visitation rights? Just get on your story on CNN and you'll be fine.

Adoption/Foster Care - I have to agree with the mainstream here. Sorry. Children need a male and female influence in the home. Studies bear this out.

Employment - Depends on what kind of employment you are talking about. If you want to be the Youth MInister in a Baptist church then you should expect that you aren't going to get the job or will get fired if found out. That's common sense.

Hate Crime Legislation - You are afforded protection.

Housing Discrimination - If you are talking about renting I would have to say that it is unfortunate, but people have the right to rent their homes/apartments to who they wish. The free society goes both ways. If you are talking about buying you may have an argument. I am not sure of lending policies to non-married mortgagees.

Education - You can attend any public university you wish. Private schools should be allowed to decide who they want as their student body. Male, female, black, white, hispanic, straight, glbt, etc. You will respond that this should affect public assistance at these schools. Maybe you're right.

Peter,

To be blunt, the way I'm reading what you write makes me think of you as an arrogant schoolyard bully... the kind whose ignorance & insecurity causes him to blindly pummel anyone who appears to be smarter, more popular, richer, etc., as long as they seem weaker than you are. I've tried waiting to respond to see if time alters my perception of you, but as of yet, it has not changed.

I will do my best to not react to your inciting words and instead respond in a firm and compassionate way with the truth.

Marriage: If you want info on marriage rights, they're not too difficult to find. In two seconds Google located this website for me: http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectID/E0366844-7992-4018-B581C6AE9BF8B045/118/304/192/ART/
Your willingness to make "factual" statements without bothering to do any research says a lot about your committment to integrity.

Adoption & Foster Care: I find it absurd that you would suggest a group home is better for a child than a family. I had the opportunity to experience being put in a group home with my three little brothers when my mother was admitted to the hospital and wouldn't tell her family she was in trouble. Between my baby brothers being freaked out, another resident trying to "escape" and screaming bloody murder when she was caught, having an older boy come on to me... you know, I think group homes are pretty horrible. I'm glad you had a good one.

Google: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/oct/17/group_homes_dont_foster_life_skills/

Employment:
Let me make this as clear as possible. If my employer discovers or perceives my sexual orientation and wants to harass, intimidate or fire me as a result, he is absolutely free to do so. Oklahoma doesn't have any glbt employment protections, so I moved from my home. The city of Austin, Texas, does. I am not going to risk my career or my family's stability by placing that kind of power in the hands of bigots. They shouldn't have that power to begin with.

Google: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_empl2.htm

Hate Crime Legislation:
I can understand how easy it would be for a close-minded person to gloss over marriage & employment rights, but physical safety? What exactly do you believe in? Does the story of the Good Samaritan mean anything to you?

Violent crimes are identified as hate crimes when the perpetrator is clearly motivated by prejudice or malice towards the victim because of REAL or PERCEIVED gender, race, religion, nation of origin, or sexual orientation.

Hate crimes are intensely more violent & lethal than other violent crimes. Matthew Shepard. James Byrd Jr. Gwen Arujo. Brandon Teena. PFC Barry Winchell. JR Warren. Danny Overstreet. Billy Jack Gaither. Bill Clayton. Tyra Hunter. Google these names.

Google: http://www.hatecrime.org/index.html, http://www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/041203/fbi.shtml, http://wcr.sonoma.edu/v2n2/umemoto.html

Housing Discrimination:
Your statement that "housing discrimination is unfortunate," but permissable is very revealing. Where on earth are your values as a Christian, let alone as an American? It is unjust & ungodly and in no way excusable.

Try denying an apartment to a Jew or an Asian person.

From the US Department of Housing & Urban Development: Housing discrimination based on your race, color, national origin, religion, sex, family status, or disability is illegal by federal law. If you have been trying to buy or rent a home or apartment and you believe your rights have been violated, you can file a fair housing complaint.

Google: http://www.hud.gov/complaints/housediscrim.cfm, http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-12/113627076252410.xml

Education:

The US Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights enforces several Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the Department of Education. These laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin, sex, disability, and on the basis of age. These laws extend to all state education agencies, elementary and secondary school systems, colleges and universities, vocational schools, proprietary schools, state vocational rehabilitation agencies, libraries, and museums that receive U.S. Department of Education funds.

Try finding an accredited school that doesn't receive US Dept. of Education Funds. I went to ORU. Here's some of their policy: The grievance procedure is designed to supplement the informal departmental means of resolving student problems or complaints in regard to discrimination based on race, color, national or ethnic origin, sex, age, disability or status as a veteran. Trust me. If a person is in a protected class, the University isn't going to discriminate... without the threat of major lawsuits.

Why shouldn't I be free to go the school I want to go to? If a school can't discriminate against me because of my race, why are they allowed to do so because of my sexuality?

Here is Maine's policy:
4. Unlawful education discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. It is unlawful education discrimination in violation of this Act, on the basis of sexual orientation, to:

A. Exclude a person from participation in, deny a person the benefits of or subject a person to discrimination in any academic, extracurricular, research, occupational training or other program or activity; [2005, c. 10, §21 (new).]

B. Deny a person equal opportunity in athletic programs; [2005, c. 10, §21 (new).]

C. Apply any rule concerning the actual or potential family or marital status of a person or to exclude any person from any program or activity because of their sexual orientation; [2005, c. 10, §21 (new).]

D. Deny admission to the institution or program or to fail to provide equal access to any information about an institution or program through recruitment; or [2005, c. 10, §21 (new).]

E. Deny financial assistance availability and opportunity. [2005, c. 10, §21 (new).]

The provisions in this subsection relating to sexual orientation do not apply to any education facility owned, controlled or operated by a bona fide religious corporation, association or society.

[2005, c. 10, §21 (new).]

Google: http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/5/title5sec4602.html, http://www.doe.mass.edu/hssss/program/ssch.html, http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/library/record/26.html, http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/know.html

Summary:

My request is that you would either make an attempt to learn something about what you "know" or you would stop trying to put off your bigoted opinions as facts.

Nate

[revtj]

Comprehensive, rational and succinct. You go! :lol:

[Peter Z]

But, I will have to later this evening. Please do not take my silence as an unwillingness to continue the dialogue.

[Zerbie]

Thank you for saying it, Nathan. I couldn't - I tried several times to start a response, but I could not do so kindly or objectively. So I left this thread, and will probably stay gone, because justifying why we/you/I have an essential (though not yet legally protected) right to basic survival things like jobs and housing gets me too angry to communicate successfully. And let's not forget that one doesn't have to be gay to be fired because your boss thinks you are. Or even gay-bashed. I read of an incident where a flat-chested woman with short hair was holding hands on the street with her boyfriend when they were assaulted by a gang of young men screaming "fags."

[Vanessa White]

I am feeling a mass of confusion here everyone. PeterZ, I am only wondering what your motivation in being here is. I am not opposed to anyone having an opinion alternate to my own. But, part of why I come to the Soulforce forums is to dialogue/converse with other persons who are LGBTQ, or allies, or at least looking to inform themselves about the topic, knowing full well that the views are pretty supportive and encouraging. I want to comment on two pieces of your first few posts that I would hope may help you to think about it in a different way. If you don't, you don't. BUt I know that I feel much less racist/agist/homophobic/sexist the more information that I get and the more that I am willing to see things from a broader, global perspective.

First, regarding hate crimes. I don't know if you were referring to the level of violence of hate crimes or not. I took your post to mean that we are already protected under hate crimes laws. I do not believe that all states have hate crimes legislation. I also know that, as Nate referred to the letter of the law, intent is part of it, it is very hard to prove. And, I don't know the statistic, but there are millions of incidents of anti-gay bias, harassment, violence every year, but many incidents are not officially reported and many may not fall under the hate crimes laws. Yet, it occurs daily for some. I don't believe I know one single LGBTQ person that has not been victim of some type of harassment or violence.

Second, I was never placed in a group home, which I am thankful for. However, I worked in the child welfare field for fifteen years, in a foster care agency. I saw dozens of children who were displaced from abusive, neglectful homes, that needed protection and support. I would have easily placed them into an appropriate foster home for their needs, including a gay person or couple, before I would see them go to a group home. I am also glad that you had a good experience, but that is certainly not the norm.
In addition, my partner legally in the state of PA adopted my biological daughter as the second parent. Two years ago, there was a lot of discussion about enacting a law in this state to prohibit gay adoption, including the possible nulling of any issued adoptions. Whether that threat was real or imagined, the intense FEAR we experienced is hard to describe. We have protected her by having her legally protected by both of us. She is happy, well adjusted, involved in many activities, and happy to have two moms. She will tell you she does not feel she is lacking anything in terms of her parentage.

I cannot debate with you what the Bible actually says nor what the actual intent was when it was written versus now- that is not a strong suit for me. However, I can only tell you that after years of being told, as a community and a person, that who we are born to be is not okay, in the eyes of those we love and others that don't even know us, is exhausting and disheartening. I am tired of taking that willingly from others, and I know that I am a beautiful child of God, not a sinner, and Jesus loves me as I am, and my family in total!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That love sometimes gets me through the most trying day.

I often distinguish "choice" between who we specifically choose to be in marriage or relationship with (your wife, for example for you) and the gender of the people that we are most drawn to (for you, female). I do believe that I have no choice about the gender whom I am drawn to (female) but every choice of who that person is that is my partner. It is the difference between orientation and behavior. Peace to you, Vanessa

[NathanATX]

In addition, my partner legally in the state of PA adopted my biological daughter as the second parent. Two years ago, there was a lot of discussion about enacting a law in this state to prohibit gay adoption, including the possible nulling of any issued adoptions. Whether that threat was real or imagined, the intense FEAR we experienced is hard to describe. We have protected her by having her legally protected by both of us. She is happy, well adjusted, involved in many activities, and happy to have two moms. She will tell you she does not feel she is lacking anything in terms of her parentage.


Talk about an attack on the family... that is mind-blowing.

I would have fled the country with my children.

God help the person that tries to harm my family.

[VeganLizZie]

i'm new at this whole forum shpeal..so i apologize ahead of time if i'm lost and have somehow stumbled into a room i shouldn't be in. haha.

anyway, my heart was absolutley greived when i saw the bus parked outside of student union today. my stomach was in knots. i am so sorry that my campus responded the way they did. it's truley embarassing.

personally, it was a pleasure to have you all come and visit and minister the way you did. my prayers are with you.

i've decided this will be my last semester at Lee. i'm still not sure what i'm going to do with my life, but if EQR wants a token straight girl on the bus, i think i would love to go on tour with you all. haha. thanks.

love you guys!

[Jamie McDaniel]

Hi VeganLizZie and welcome to the Soulforce website!

I understand the Equality Riders were really moved by the students at Lee who came out to meet with them.

For those reading, here is the official PR.
www.soulforce.org/article/771 (http://www.soulforce.org/article/771)

They're on their way to Union University now.

Also, I see that you are a vegan. I'm vegetarian. :)

[Emproph]

Let’s look at a few things here.

PeterZ has started two threads now in regard to the exact same thing:
I have no problem with your desire to open the dialogue with the conservative right. My concern is that you are dressing up your own intolerant agenda in the disguise of open dialogue.
The first thread was abandoned for the redundancy of this one, and was riddled with non-response on his part to points made and questions asked, just as in this thread. It also included this little gem:
Allow me to be clear on a couple of points: ...#3 - I have nothing to lose if I am wrong. I can (and do) accept homosexuals for who they are and hope that they find the fullness of life that Jesus describes in John 10:10. But, what if you're wrong?

My response, first thread:
To ask me to consider that I might be wrong implies you are unwilling to consider the same of yourself, breaking the golden rule that Christianity is based on and disqualifying you from asking the question as a Christian.

It further implies that in the midst of the overwhelming rhetoric of my evil sickness, that I have never considered before that I might be wrong, and have frivolously concluded that my sinful behavior is equal to heterosexuality, which also implies I do not know the difference between love and evil.

Jamie responded to this in the first thread:
It further implies that in the midst of the overwhelming rhetoric of my evil sickness, that I have never considered before that I might be wrong, and have frivolously concluded that my sinful behavior is equal to heterosexuality”

Jamie’s response first thread:
I thought Emproph's response illustrates a recurring frustration we gays and lesbians have with our heterosexual brothers and sisters. Many of us went through long struggles where we fought our orientations for years because we believed the teachings of our denominations. We forfeited relationships and said things that weren't exactly true trying to prove to God and ourselves that we were actually straight. Some of our fellow gays do not make it through that struggle.
Once we reach the place of finally accepting ourselves, though, a strange thing happens in regard to our relationships and conversations with many heterosexual Christians. They ask us, "Have you ever considered the idea that you might not be gay?" None redressed until this second thread started. Regarding the EXACT same subject.

Posted by me, in this thread, regarding examples of oppression:
And in response to your clarification that it was indeed love and you didn't choose it, you were then dismissed as being too stupid to realize that you were actually attracted to the opposite sex...If you consider yourself a Christian, that's just more proof of how delusional you are, because if you were a true Christian you'd be fully heterosexual...

Part of response:
I am not judging anyone on this board. I know that I am coming across as "just one more so-called Christian trying to turn you straight." I assure you that is not my intention. My intention is to get you to consider whether you might be wrong.
Translation: It’s not my intention to turn you straight, I just want you to consider whether you may be wrong about being gay.
Further:
I wrote this elsewhere and was challenged that I have not considered if I am wrong. Well, whoever wrote that did not read my entire statement. If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose.
The above was his response to:
To ask me to consider that I might be wrong implies you are unwilling to consider the same of yourself, breaking the golden rule that Christianity is based on and disqualifying you from asking the question as a Christian.
Translation: In order to dismiss my breaking of the golden rule that Christianity is based on, what is most important to share, is that I’m going to heaven either way. That’s supposed to show that I don’t even NEED to be here witnessing to all you ‘too stupid to realize you don’t even deserve salvation.’ As long as long as I play the “dialogue” card, you’ll never be the wiser. But just to make sure I’ll pretend I’m a victim by accusing “whoever” of “did not read my entire statement.”

{I tried God, but for some reason, they just wouldn’t listen to me tell them (in love), and repeatedly just how stupid they all truly are. My only heartfelt concern God, was to show them that it’s precisely their idiocy that blocks them from realizing the difference between right and wrong, ho hum. It’s a shame I have nothing to lose if I’m wrong, otherwise I’d have the opportunity to examine myself, introspect, self reflect. But alas, unlike them, I didn’t choose to love what revolts me the most. There but for the grace of God go I.}

Well, I’m “whoever,” and I did read your entire statement, and you are wrong. You’ve responded to my concern of insult and oppression with further insult and oppression, you’ve LOST my TRUST. I recognize now you never considered it of value.

I’m sure those of us who've posted here all have one or more questions or points conveniently avoided or outright disposed of by Peter Z in this thread, so please feel free to share. These are a couple of my favorites:

#1 (Joe Brummer #26)
PeterZ, Please atake a moment of your day to visit www.Colage.org
{In response to SolInvictus calling him on non-response to above} (#29)
(Title-Statistics mean very little) There are always exceptions and you can make the data suit any agenda (that goes for anyone)...and, that entire line of debate only came up because someone suggested that glbt could NOT adopt children. It sounds as if they can, so that should be removed from a list of inequality.

Translation:
All healthy functional children raised by gay couples or anyone gay for that matter, are “statistics,” “exceptions” and “data” to “suit any agenda.”
-As long as I say “(that goes for anyone),” in regard to my painting the adoption of children by anyone “glbt” as an agenda, no one will suspect that I have an agenda.
-Then I am free to discredit the “entire line of debate,” by blanketly dismissing it because it “only came up because someone suggested that glbt could NOT adopt children.” “It sounds as if they can, so that should be removed from a list of inequality.”
-Making “Sounds as if,” ample criteria for making the determination, “should” be removed from a list of inequality.

#2 (title #24) Peter Z’s patronizing 'response' to revtj’s respectful and open response #23.
TJ, you are speaking out of hurt not logic
revtj (Justified, and respectful post! -regarding below quote#25)
Don’t tell me how I’m speaking
Peter Z (#28)
your “tone” seems very hateful.
revtj is then invited to Atlanta “so that we are both aware of non-verbal communication.”
{Thus indemnifying Peter Z. His innocence is just a plane trip away.}


Look at this. He has every one of us hanging on his every word because he presents himself as wanting to “dialogue,” when at best he’s disrespectful AND has no short term memory.
Or, out of the goodness of his prideful little heart, the only way he can get us to accept how stupid we all are is to lie about his motives (precisely the accusation he's levied against Soulforce).
At worst, he is a troll having fun fooling us all and is not even a “Christian.”

In any case it's unacceptable and un-Christian behavior.

**************Stop feeding it! -He’s got plenty to answer for***************


Oh and Peter, if you respond to this, please don't forget to use manipulative adjectives like "sad" and "dissapointed," otherwise I won't know to feel guilty.

-For more information on trolling, please click on the following links:
http://www.digitalhomecanada.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36340
http://www.urban75.com/Mag/troll.html

[keltic63]

I know I didn't get a response to this:
Allow me to state upfront that I think it is a shame that GLBT people have been victimized with hate-crimes. There is no place for that in a pluralistic society (or any society for that matter). With that said...

With the expection of same-sex marriage, where is your equality being oppressed? (Please, no rhetoric!) Because you cannot attend a university like Lee or Liberty? I ask, why would an openly GLBT want to attend these universities? You would only be inviting ridicule and condemnation. It is like you are picking a fight to show how oppressed you are.
The statement that I've put in bold print shows that these schools do engage in harmful treatment of lgbt people. I've proven it by PeterZ's own words. Soulforce is asking them to stop.

Because ridicule and condemnation are not of God; those who show this to glbt people lack a basic understanding of God's love, as well as the great commandment. It has already been demonstrated that there are students attending these universities who are glbt. Would you invite them to leave? Your statement demonstrates that you know these colleges are behaving inappropriately toward glbt students. could it be your resentment of the equality ride is because they threaten to expose the shameful discriminating policies of those universities? Again I ask, what is your resentment of the Equality Ride about? You have stated that these schools engage in discriminatory (and unChristian) ways. Do you think the victims should remain silent? should other potential victims also remain silent?

[revtj]

LOVE THE SINNER, HATE THEIR CLOTHES!

...in the case of PZ, sheepskin, I do believe...

[Peter Z]

I cannot possibly answer everything that is being thrown my way. I wish I could, I simply do not have the time. Plus, it's the first weekend of March Madness, so priorities must be aligned. :)

Most of the dialgogue here has been between TJ and me concerning Nouwen. So, to that I say, I don't think I am projecting the "Madonna/Whore" motif upon Nouwen. If it were to be revealed that Nouwen was a practicing homosexual it would in no way discredit the quality of his life's work or writings. His books have ministered to me in profound ways. TJ, I think you might be misunderstanding what I am saying. (semantically speaking) I am suggesting that if Nouwen were a practicing homosexual he would not have been able to write and minister the way he did. Do not confuse this with NOT ALLOWED. I think it is precisely this sexual tension in his life out of which he was able to be so effective. We serve a strange God and for some reason He honors self-denial. We are going to have to agree to disagree on this topic, it is turning into the never ending thread!

I will sum up all of the other accusations towards me with this:
I am sorry if I am coming across as judgmental. It is not my intention. I really am interested in a dialogue. Unfortunately, I have this unsatiable desire to always be right. The Lord is working on me. TJ, if you would like to continue the dialogue in Atlanta, feel free to email me at already_notyet_tension@yahoo.com

I would like to COMMEND the Equality Riders for their recent trip to Lee University in Cleveland, TN. From what I understand, your visit was non-disruptive and many Lee students were able to engage you in conversation. My concern was stemming from the arrests at Liberty. I assumed, incorrectly, that "tactics" might only get worse. I am sure that you can understand my assumptions in this case. I am sorry that your bus was vandalized while in Cleveland. I pray that it was not a Lee student or anyone who considers himself a Christian that did this. Whether I agree with you or not, I wish your group no harm. I am glad that Lee students assisted you cleaning the bus.

I do feel as though I need to address one further quote from Emorph.

Translation: It’s not my intention to turn you straight, I just want you to consider whether you may be wrong about being gay.

Sorry, but poor translation. You may very well be right about being gay, it is your hermeneutics that I am more concerned about.

[Dash]

An interesting part of this thread has been the question, "What if you are wrong?" An excellent question!!

Now, this is just the way I look at it. Ya'll let me know what you think....

In one of the parables that Jesus told, he described a servant who was given a small amount of money by his master. This guy went out and buried the cash for fear of losing it. When the boss came back asking for what had been entrusted to him, he said, "I knew you were a harsh master, so I buried the money for safekeeping. Here...I give back what you gave me."

This didn't please the boss, who took some umbrage at being known as a "harsh man". He insisted the servant should have at the very least put it where it could earn some interest.

Now, after all my struggles with God (yeah, it's been a stormy relationship at times) I can't look at God as a harsh master. Yes, there is risk involved in living my life as a gay man. I don't have all the comforts of living sensibly by the laws written in stone and ink. I'm following the law that has been written on my heart, and taking guidance from prayer and humble questioning. I think I can give a good return for my labor. I think there's a chance I can do something wonderful with the gay identity that has been given me. It's an investment...one I'm passionate about.

And...I'm sorry...but I'm not afraid. I'm not afraid of the law. I'm not afraid of the church. I'm not afraid of hell. And by heaven! I'm not afraid of my God. The love that I feel so ardently burning upon me from the Divine has been confirmed again and again. I so unfaithful at times! Disbelieving. Walking out on the relationship more than once. Despairing! But not that love. It's always there, and I will risk my soul on that investment.

Whew! There ain't nothin' better than turning 30, my friends. I was sooo happy to put my desperate 20s behind me! :lol:

As I said, let me know how this strikes you.

[Peter Z]

And by heaven! I'm not afraid of my God.

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."

[Dash]

And perfect love drives out fear. :p

I won't be burying my gay identity.

[revtj]

Peter,

I want to thank you for the recent post. It seemed the most sincere of all to me. I respect your position on Nouwen a lot more now.

I also want to acknowledge your struggle with wanting to be right. Wow, can I go there! I was raised to believe the catechism and the Bible had ALL the answers. And that was a good thing because the Spirit's call on my life made me want to be absolutely sure. They wanted me to believe there was no such thing as a grey area.

If I have let go of the need to be right and embrace the grey areas, it has been through being a pastor and a chaplain. I have frequent experiences with people at the edge of death and it changes anyone who is open to be changed.

I have done extensive work in Alzheimer's wards and it caused me to question the whole idea of true religion being about right answers. Many times I have been with people who were once the pillars of their church, well known to eveyone as deeply committed & devoted christians. Now they can't remember their name. And I hasten to add that almost 100% of the time their churches have nothing to do with them now that they are this ill.

I began to ask God, you know, if that thing I was raised with, <cue:Charlton Heston voice> "If you were to die tonight and stand before God and he were to ask you 'why should I let you into my heaven?', was baloney. I could not imagine a loving God turning someone away because they forgot their dogma.

To make a long story short, I am convinced that true religion, true christianity if you will, is about right action not right (exact) beliefs. And I have searched the scriptures over & over and it keeps coming to me. Let me be clear, I am not talking about a salvation by works. I am talking about grace being a whole lot wider & deeper than we humans can imagine. I am saying it's a matter of the heart (which we can't see but God alone can see.)

When you look at the early church scattered over the Mesopotamian world, each one of them had peculiar beliefs in addition to believeing Jesus was the Messiah. So do all churches to this day. If only one of them is right, the majority of us are probably doomed. But that is just not the God I know anymore.

I think we should discuss the question of gay christians or gay ordination, on the way to Habitat for Humanity, or to visit prisoners jailed for protesting the exportation of wars, or for standing against hatespeech, or to a homeless shelter to feed & clothe the people. That kind of action is the only thing that puts these bitter arguments, which split churches and turn whole groups of people against another group of people, in their proper context.

The Soulforce forums are really here for gay christians & our allies (some of whom are str8, bi, &/or not christian, and some who are questioning and confused or lonely) to get together and give us a sense of not being alone. I know we all welcome people who disagree with us, but if it turns into a dogfight, it's because we come here hoping for support. We are caught in the dogfight out there already, where 1000s of religious people publicly say hateful & untrue things about LGBT people all the time. I come here for encouragement to keep up the struggle for God's greater justice & love.

So we probably owe you an apology too, Peter. I'll be the first to admit that. I will consider meeting you for coffee but I am on my way out of town for a well-deserved vacation. Be well.

Peace
tj

[Joe Brummer]

The fear of the lord is wisdom, it teaches us that we must at all xost, follow his commandments. The sremon on the Mount explains all.

[tdogg]

In addition to wisdom, the fear of the Lord is also respect. This has nothing to do with being afraid, or frightened. Only a profound consideration and awe for all that God is and does. I do not and can not believe that God wants us to live in quaking frightening fear of Him. That would mean we chose (I don't think choice is the word here tho) to follow a God by force, oppression and a desperate attempt to survive - not a choice really, but a last ditch desperate effort to retain some sort of life both mortal and eternal. That is definitely not the God I know.

[revtj]

Mary, the mother of Jesus, saw an angel prior to the child's birth who explained what was about to happen. And the angel said what?

The gospel of Jesus Christ begins in a field where shepherds were watching sheep. The angels appeared and said what?

Joseph, Mary's baby's 'daddy', saw an angel in a dream who told him to take the baby & his mother to Egypt. And the angel said what?

Jesus saw his disciples several times in his resurrected state and what did he say to them?

Please meditate upon your answers in prayer. Search the scriptures if you don't remember the stories. (clue: same answer for all stories :D )

Bottom line: To believe in Jesus is to let go of the kind of fear that paralyzes a person, that makes us inflexible, that keeps us addicted to Law and afraid of Good News, that makes us insist on being correct, that makes us choose judging a person over loving a person, that makes us self-loathing and self-rejecting. To let go of this kind of fear is the beginning of gospel faith. Then we can reverence God and respond to God's amazing grace.

[SolInvictus]

"It is through faith that all of you are God's sons in union with Christ Jesus. You were baptised into union with Christ, and now you are clothed, so to speak, with the life of Jesus Himself. So there is no difference between the Jews and Gentiles, between slave and free man, between man and woman; you are all in union with Christ."
-- Galatians 3:26-28

"I lie down and sleep; I wake again, for the Lord sustains me. I am not afraid of ten thousands of people who have set themselves against me 'round about."
-- Psalm 3:5-6

"Love all creation. The whole and every grain of sand in it. Love every leaf, and every ray of light. Love the plants. Love the animals. Love everything. If you love everything, you will percieve the Divine Mystery in all things. Once you percieve it, you will comprehend it better every day. And you will, at last, to love the whole world with an all embracing love" - Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov.

"A teacher of the Law came up and tried to trap Jesus. Teacher, he asked, what must I do to recieve eternal life? Jesus answered him, What do the scriptures say? How do you interpret them? The man answered, Love the Lord your God with all your heart, will all your strength, and with all your mind, and Love your neighbor as yourself" - Luke 10:25-26 Good News Bible translation.

To me, this verses are very inspiring, and supporting TJ's statement, Love conquers Fear and Hate every time.

[tdogg]

TJ and SolInvictus - thanks, well said! Very inspiring! Here is a quote sent to me this weekend from Wisdom Tips:

"Listen carefully to the judgments of others, as there is a great tendency to judge others by what they fear to be already within themselves."

Not sure if it really fits in this thread - but so true.

If God is love, then how can He be Fear and Terror? Jesus taught love and He taught tolerence, it's a shame how some who call themselves Christians forget Jesus teachings due to their own deeply rooted, hidden (or not so hidden) fears.

[SolInvictus]

Thank you tdogg and agreed - Love erases all fear and hatred.

[Jennifer5]

HI! Glad you're here:D

[Vanessa White]

"Spread love everywhere you go.... be the expression of God's kindness; Kindness in your face, kindness in your eyes, Kindness in your smile, kindness in your warm greeting." Mother Teresa

[maklelan]

I read the title of this thread and thought I could add something to the debate. I've posted something remotely similar in another thread, but it's aimed at something different. I'm a student at Brigham Young University. We're supposed to receive a visit from y'all in April. The visit is, according to your mission statement, a "confrontation" of some sort. I can only assume you're trying to influence some of the policies here. The mission statement said the visits are taking place because we apparently "ban the enrollment of GLBT students." I'd like to point out that this is not true. BYU does not ban the enrollment of GLBT students. We allow anyone with a decent academic record to enroll.

What we do have is an "honor code," or signed agreement that the student will live by a certain set of principles. These principles are so that the students can enjoy their education in an atmosphere consistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ as we understand it to be. All students must abide by these rules, including, but not limited to, being honest and living a chaste and virtuous life, repsecting others, participating regularly in church services, avoiding consumption of alcohol and drugs, tobacco, pornography, gambling and maintaining strict grooming guidelines. If anyone feels harrassed or oppressed, it is because someone is not living up to their commitment, not because of the policies.

As far as chastity goes, the following things are pointed out as violations of that part of the agreement: extra-marital relations, promiscuity or predatory behavior, aberrant behavior, solicitation of sex, homosexual conduct and cross-dressing. This precedes that section: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and BYU affirm that sexual relationships outside the covenant of marriage are inappropriate."

No man or woman is prohibited from enrolling at BYU because of their sexual orientation, but if you break the honor code you may be expelled. It's not against the rules to be gay at BYU, it's just against the rules to engage in homosexual relations, just as it's against the rules for me to go out and have heterosexual relations. Someone asked earlier why a homosexual would want to attend one of these universities. The answer came back that all you wanted was equal treatment. At BYU you receive perfectly equal treatment. I am not allowed to have sex with a woman any more than you're allowed to have sex with a member of your own gender.

Perhaps you want to improve the overall attitude of the University in relation to your demographic. That's perfectly fine. I know there are some homophobic people at BYU, but an aggressive confrontation on our campus is only going to make that worse. You can blame it on them if you want, but don't get upset when you throw gasoline on a fire and it doesn't go out. Confrontation is not the way to go about it, and when your confrontation leads to more misunderstandings you will have no one to blame but yourselves. I know that you guys are stereotyped, but I also know that it is common for people who don't agree with homosexuality to be stereotyped as being homophobic. This is just as fallacious a generalization. I am not afraid of homosexuals; I am not threatened by them or opposed to equal rights; I'm all for gay marriage; but coming to my school to tell me that I am wrong and that I should be running my religion differently is overstepping toleration on your part. I will tolerate you till the ends of the earth, but please afford me the same right. You are just as welcome here as anyone else, and you will be expelled just as quickly for having sex as I will. Can you tolerate that much equality?

[NathanATX]

Does your school enroll married students?

Presumably yes. If so, those students are probably having sex.

Since marriage is a right to the priviliged heterosexual class, it is a clear injustice to deny enrollment to a homosexual person in a loving & committed relationship.

If they were allowed to marry in Utah, they would.

[maklelan]

And what is my school's responsibility in regards to the state laws?

[maklelan]

Is it an injustice for someone to come into a private religious university and tell them that they must violate their most sacred and important doctrinal beliefs because that person, despite not wanting to come to the school, feels they should have the right to? Where are my rights in this? Am I not allowed to practice my religion according to the dictates of my own conscience? Is that not one of the fundamental rights that accompanies the one you are fighting tooth and nail to secure for yourself? We established this school so we could educate ourselves in an atmosphere condusive to what we believe. Now you are coming in to say that our right to practice our religious beliefs in our own space infringes upon your right to go to whatever school you want? I do not agree. My liberty ends where yours begins, but yours also ends at mine. You are currently trying to tell me you can walk on mine if you want, but I better stay away from yours.

[JWcaliboy]

My love for my wife is a chosen sexual behavior/emotion. I chose her, I choose her today, and I will continue to choose her.



I have never said this or thought this. You are created in the image of God. But, you were born an enemy of God and so was I! That image has been disfigured and is in need of restoral. That is what redemption is all about. We have ALL sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Christ's work on the cross provides the restoration that we all need.



One of my favorite authors/theologians is a man named Henri Nouwen. Nouwen recalls having homosexual tendencies as early as six years old. This is about the same time that he felt an overwhelming call to the ministry. From my research, I don't think that Nouwen ever acted on his homosexual desires. But, you can see his hurt throughout his writings, especially a book like The Wounded Healer. I would suggest reading some of his material.

I am sorry that you have been wounded. I cannot pretend to understand the struggle you deal with everyday. But, I do understand a little about redemption. I understand that Christ can make us a "new Creation." I understand that God is not the author of confusion. I understand that Jesus has promised us life and life to the full. You say that you believe in God and His son, Jesus Christ. I can accept that. You say that you were born this way. I can accept that we are all born into sin. You say that the Lord accepts you just the way you are. I can accept that, too. He accepts me just the way I am but he doesn't expect me to stay this way. The Lord expects me to grow more like Him everyday. I would like to say that I am doing the best that I can, but I fail. And when I fail I go to the cross. At the cross is where He makes all things new. He brings clarity to my confusion, hope for my life and restoration for my soul. I am not judging anyone on this board. I know that I am coming across as "just one more so-called Christian trying to turn you straight." I assure you that is not my intention. My intention is to get you to consider whether you might be wrong. I wrote this elsewhere and was challenged that I have not considered if I am wrong. Well, whoever wrote that did not read my entire statement. If I am wrong, I have nothing to lose. It would not affect my view of God, my relationship with my family, or my ministry. I just happen to believe Jesus when He says "narrow is the way." You can call me narrow minded all day long, but I'd be careful doing that with Jesus. Call me a right-wing (which I'm not!!!) evangelical (also not!!!) fundamentalist (definitely NOT!!!) for trying to have an orthodox hermeneutic of Scripture.


To NathanATX



Marriage - true, I actually do not have a problem with a civil same sex marriage. I personally think that any marriage outside of the church is not ordained of God. I also believe that someone like JLo or Liz Taylor have done much more harm to the institute of marriage than any loving same sex couple. But, name the rights and responsibilities you are losing. I am not aware of any additional rights that I have being married. Joint filing of taxes? Not a big deal. Hospital visitation rights? Just get on your story on CNN and you'll be fine.
Adoption/Foster Care - I have to agree with the mainstream here. Sorry. Children need a male and female influence in the home. Studies bear this out.
Employment - Depends on what kind of employment you are talking about. If you want to be the Youth MInister in a Baptist church then you should expect that you aren't going to get the job or will get fired if found out. That's common sense.

Hate Crime Legislation - You are afforded protection.

Housing Discrimination - If you are talking about renting I would have to say that it is unfortunate, but people have the right to rent their homes/apartments to who they wish. The free society goes both ways. If you are talking about buying you may have an argument. I am not sure of lending policies to non-married mortgagees.

Education - You can attend any public university you wish. Private schools should be allowed to decide who they want as their student body. Male, female, black, white, hispanic, straight, glbt, etc. You will respond that this should affect public assistance at these schools. Maybe you're right.
you are kind of correct, but I think there are alot of RED STATES that dont have hate crime legislation. In California we still dont have a law that protects gay kids in schools. In the state that Matthew Shepherd was killed in, there is still no hate crime legislation.
And that is really sad that we cant. I was thinking about being a youth pastor for a few years, but why cant I? Just because I am gay? I can refute anything that conservatives throw at me from the bible.

Ok lets say this, a man who was with his partner for over sixty years since they met in high school, both rented for so many years. The partner dies, he is left no money from life insurance, he already has countless amounts of health problems with him. He doesnt have enough money to pay for rent, he is kicked out, he is living on the streets. Just think, if he was married that would of never happened.
Regarding gay couples and kids and straight families studies do not bear this. I know you didnt put this, but did you know there is no test that proves that gay couples raise gay sons or daughters more than a straight couple, at least no respectable sociologist study.

[awediot]

I agree that private institutions have the right to accept or deny any type of behavior, any shade of skin, any gender, religion, age, status, I.Q., etc. that they choose. This very site will not tolerate certain behaviors. Such is the give and take of freedom.

The difference is, you are called to restrain your natural desires for a few years or find another school, we are called to change our perverted Soul or go to Hell.

It is that message that destroys us, and fighting back sometimes may get off track. Your school is just one of many killing jars, smotherring the life from some of your friends, for their own good. Where and how to bypass their well meaning, poisonous influences creates the turmoil screaming from these pages

[themattperry]

I agree that private institutions have the right to accept or deny any type of behavior, any shade of skin, any gender, religion, age, status, I.Q., etc. that they choose.

Actually, this is only true if the institutions forgo all public funds. No institution that refuses to admit or treat equally people of all races, disabilities, etc ... will recieve public funding in the form of grants from the federal government. My guess is that all the institutions that SoulForce is visiting receive such money. Why are they allowed to accept my tax dollars for their programs and still discriminate against me and people like me?

I hope you are all doing well today!

[maklelan]

The difference is, you are called to restrain your natural desires for a few years or find another school, we are called to change our perverted Soul or go to Hell.

We don't ask you to change you soul, we just ask you to refrain your natural desires for a few years. We don't believe you'll go to Hell, because you haven't entered into a covenant with God like we have. We don't believe your soul is perverted, we believe it is what you have been given. Some are given other challenges. Every man will be judged based on their living up to the light and knowledge they receive in this life. That is our doctrine, so please don't make assumptions about what we believe and why we have the policies we have.

Actually, this is only true if the institutions forgo all public funds. No institution that refuses to admit or treat equally people of all races, disabilities, etc ... will recieve public funding in the form of grants from the federal government. My guess is that all the institutions that SoulForce is visiting receive such money. Why are they allowed to accept my tax dollars for their programs and still discriminate against me and people like me?

The government has only stated that their funding is predicated on our allowing Army recruiters to be on the campus, and we acquiesced. They have said nothing of our honor code policies. The money the government gives us is nothing compared to what we give. LDS people pay a 10% tithing on their increase, and part ofthat tithing (from all over the world) subsidizes LDS schools. I payed BYU far more than you ever will, so who's rights override whose?

In addition, I would like to point out, again, that we do not discriminate against gays. We ask that any gays attending follow the exact same rules that every other student attending must follow. If you refuse to follow the rules then you are not admitted, just like any other human being on the planet. The fact that the rules preclude any sexual activity on your part is not discriminatory. It's unfortunate, btu not discriminatory. Men with long hair who refuse to cut their hair aren't hopping on a bus to come picket any time soon.

[zephyr013]

I believe three very important things to remember are the legacies of the two men at the top left corner of the screen, and the legacy of Christ above all.

If I am not mistaken, the reason for the Equality rides is not necessarily to change the mind of anyone at the schools, but to open those minds to possibilities of truth that may be overlooked.

Ghandi never said that his truth was the truth. Indeed, part of the Satyagraha oath, which I would bet the equality riders had to at least review, is the possibility that our opponent may have some insight into the truth that we do not have.

The desire for dialogue stems from the quest for truth.

[zephyr013]

Does one person's "rights" ever trump another's?

[maklelan]

Based on the mission statement of the Equality Ride and the response of people here, I don't believe your ideal is overriding the indignation that's been expressed. I truly wish it were, but I'm scared there's gonna be more anger than love shared.

[themattperry]

The government has only stated that their funding is predicated on our allowing Army recruiters to be on the campus, and we acquiesced. They have said nothing of our honor code policies. The money the government gives us is nothing compared to what we give. LDS people pay a 10% tithing on their increase, and part ofthat tithing (from all over the world) subsidizes LDS schools. I payed BYU far more than you ever will, so who's rights override whose?

BYU accepts plenty of federal money. (Here's an example: http://bioagnews.byu.edu/newsrelease.aspx?ID=101) I'm sure they take in much more from the Mormon Church. I'm only concerned about the Federal Money, because some of it comes from ME!!! Any school that accepts federal grant money must comply with federal minority protections such as the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), and must admit students of any race. African Americans don't put up with publicly funded institutions using their tax money to exclude them ... neither do people with disabilities. Why should I? maklelan, do you have an answer for me? I am aware that the federal government does not require institutions to admit gay and lesbian students as a requirement of accepting this money. I am saying that they SHOULD, as a matter of justice. Do you agree? Would you like your tax dollars to go to a school that did not admit "people like you"?


In addition, I would like to point out, again, that we do not discriminate against gays. We ask that any gays attending follow the exact same rules that every other student attending must follow. If you refuse to follow the rules then you are not admitted, just like any other human being on the planet. The fact that the rules preclude any sexual activity on your part is not discriminatory. It's unfortunate, btu not discriminatory. Men with long hair who refuse to cut their hair aren't hopping on a bus to come picket any time soon.


I'm not sure how to say this ... but this argument is incoherent and just plain incorrect.

I have argued at length elsewhere on this forum that that any policy that singles out "homosexual activity". "homosexual conduct", or "homosexuality" is discriminatory in and of itself. Why? Simply because a rule that bans or outlaws something characteristic of a defined group of people DISCRIMINATES against that group. I will repeat an example: suppose I was put in charge of all the primates on earth and I decreed that under no circumstances were any primates allowed to read books. Out of all the chimps, orangutans, gorillas and assorted monkeys, I'm sure it is the humans that would complain about this law (at least the literate humans)... According to your argument, maklelan, this law would nevertheless not be discriminatory because it applies to all primates equally. I wonder if the humans would agree? This is a fanciful example to be sure ... but it is absolutely logically equivalent to what you claim.

On the other hand, if a law were to just ban any sexual activity between unmarried people regardless of gender, that would be less discriminatory. I have a feeling you have that law on the books at BYU as well. So my question is ... why not just leave it at that? Why go the extra mile to insert a direct reference to gays and lesbians that renders your rules highly discriminatory? If you didn't have this rule on your books, then SoulForce would not be at your doorstep.

Maklelan, the fact that you are eager to argue that the rules at BYU do not discriminate gives me great hope. I feel from you that you know that discriminaton is wrong ... and that, at least, is a starting point, and a welcome one.

Welcome to these forums Meklelan -- I hope you stick around ... you are always welcome here. Even if there are heated arguments and difficult issues, I hope we can address eachother in a spirit of love and acceptance.

[maklelan]

Does one person's "rights" ever trump another's?

The dialogue here is that I must cede my right to practice my religion to others' right to go to whatever school they want.

[maklelan]

BYU accepts plenty of federal money. (Here's an example: http://bioagnews.byu.edu/newsrelease.aspx?ID=101) I'm sure they take in much more from the Mormon Church. I'm only concerned about the Federal Money, because some of it comes from ME!!! Any school that accepts federal grant money must comply with federal minority protections such as the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), and must admit students of any race. African Americans don't put up with publicly funded institutions using their tax money to exclude them ... neither do people with disabilities. Why should I? maklelan, do you have an answer for me? I am aware that the federal government does not require institutions to admit gay and lesbian students as a requirement of accepting this money. I am saying that they SHOULD, as a matter of justice. Do you agree? Would you like your tax dollars to go to a school that did not admit "people like you"?

You shouldn't put up with that, and BYU doesn't do that. We admit anyone who has good enough grades, but our honor code must be signed and followed. Everyone is under the same obligations. SHOULD you be allowed in? It doesn't bother me at all, but the vast majority of the people that come to this school come because they can get an education surrounded by people who hold and practice the same values as them. That is why BYU exists. If justice allows you to have a freebie, most of the school is going to be denied what they came to the school for, and most of the alumni will pull their funding.

There are many schools that don't admit people like me solely on the basis of my religion. I have a friend who tried to enroll his child in a very nice Christian school in Dallas and they told him no because the child was "not a Christian." That school receives government funding, but he didn't raise a stink, he just went to another school.

why not just leave it at that? Why go the extra mile to insert a direct reference to gays and lesbians that renders your rules highly discriminatory?

Because it is part of our doctrine. Why is it ok to object to extra-marital sex, but not to homosexual sex? I'm straight. If a straight man has an incredibly stong desire to go have sex or do it himself you are ok with us kicking him out, but because you're gay you're allowed to have sex with whomever you wish? That's not equality. You say a loving and caring monogamous relationship should make it ok, but we don't believe a homosexual marriage is ordained of God. What about the people who come in and want polygamy to be accepted? You would shun that belief. Would we have to let them in, too? It's not equality if we don't. Our school exists to teach and practice our particular doctrine.

Here's a good statement on our beliefs about marriage and family life:

http://lds.org/gospellibrary/0,5082,4-1,00.html

Go there and click on Family Proclamation. Let me know what your thoughts are.

[closetcougar]

Amen a thousand times over!!!!!
As a gay student at BYU in a committed relationship of over 5 years, I would in a heartbeat. My partner was my first and is my last. Still not chaste enough though...
It just doesn't make sense.
What is interesting is that if a person were to abuse their spouse at BYU, they would not (and have not) receive as harsh of punishment as a gay person who was expressing their love in a committed relationship would. I know you are going to argue this point with me, Maklelan, but I know this to be a fact and if I told you how I knew... I'd have to well, you know, breathe on you and give you "the gay.":rainbow: :eek:

[Venari]

Amen a thousand times over!!!!!
As a gay student at BYU in a committed relationship of over 5 years, I would in a heartbeat. My partner was my first and is my last. Still not chaste enough though...

Closet,

At the risk of offending someone. You seem to be the exception to the rule. Of the students I have known to be dismissed from a Christian University homosexuality was never the sole reason. I would dare to say that all the ones I have personally known have engaged in sexual relations with numerous partners with only one settling into a "committed" relationship at the time they were dismissed.

I personally cannot comment on your situation but so far I have known three students who claimed to be "chaste." Two only considered anal sex to be sex and had engaged in oral sex with various partners and the third only considered entrance of an orifice to be sex and had engaged in mutual masturbation with numerous partners. I should note I have also known heterosexual students to do the same things.

But the point being your extolling your relationship as a bastion of sorts yet reality seems to hold the opposite for many homosexual students at Christian Universities.

-Venari

[closetcougar]

Closet,

At the risk of offending someone. You seem to be the exception to the rule. Of the students I have known to be dismissed from a Christian University homosexuality was never the sole reason. I would dare to say that all the ones I have personally known have engaged in sexual relations with numerous partners with only one settling into a "committed" relationship at the time they were dismissed.

I personally cannot comment on your situation but so far I have known three students who claimed to be "chaste." Two only considered anal sex to be sex and had engaged in oral sex with various partners and the third only considered entrance of an orifice to be sex and had engaged in mutual masturbation with numerous partners. I should note I have also known heterosexual students to do the same things.

But the point being your extolling your relationship as a bastion of sorts yet reality seems to hold the opposite for many homosexual students at Christian Universities.
-Venari

Good Point.
And I honestly don't think that my way is the only way, but am aware of at least 3 more couples at BYU who fit this (not one partner ever, but monogomous long-term committed relationships).
However, at BYU, a gay person engaging in a homosexual sexual act is dealt with much more harshly than a heterosexual person engaging in the same acts.

I think that it is interesting that one of the best teachings of the LDS church is the idea of agency on earth. We are free to choose.
If someone who is 18 chooses to have multiple sexual partners, how will that affect someone's testimony of God or of their religion. If their beleifs are, indeed true, won't they withstand the noises that come from the apartment next door?

[Venari]

However, at BYU, a gay person engaging in a homosexual sexual act is dealt with much more harshly than a heterosexual person engaging in the same acts.

This rises a point. It that the stance at all the schools? Or for the sake of media attention are the leaders of the Equality Ride imposing that image on all the schools?

As I noted in other threads there seems to be a disparity between what is said by the leaders of the Equality Ride and what is really going at these schools. So how can there be an honest claim to dialogue when it seems to be forced on the schools through the clever uses of misinformation… or to quote Orwell “doubletalk” and “doublethink.”

-Venari

[zephyr013]

Closet,

At the risk of offending someone. You seem to be the exception to the rule. Of the students I have known to be dismissed from a Christian University homosexuality was never the sole reason. I would dare to say that all the ones I have personally known have engaged in sexual relations with numerous partners with only one settling into a "committed" relationship at the time they were dismissed.

I personally cannot comment on your situation but so far I have known three students who claimed to be "chaste." Two only considered anal sex to be sex and had engaged in oral sex with various partners and the third only considered entrance of an orifice to be sex and had engaged in mutual masturbation with numerous partners. I should note I have also known heterosexual students to do the same things.

But the point being your extolling your relationship as a bastion of sorts yet reality seems to hold the opposite for many homosexual students at Christian Universities.

Venari,

Yes, you offended me. You should be careful about making wide generalized assumptions about a group of people based on limited knowledge of a few individuals.

I grant you the fact that there are promisuous gay people out there. But there are just as many, if not more, who are committed to a monogamous relationship.

[Venari]

Venari,
Yes, you offended me. You should be careful about making wide generalized assumptions about a group of people based on limited knowledge of a few individuals.

I did not make an assumption I stated a fact from what I have seen in relation to homosexual students I have known to attend a Christian University. Normally I would offer an apology if I offended someone but in this case it would not be warranted as you missed the larger point.

That is I for one know not to apply those individual situations to the larger whole but that is what the majority of my school community sees as an example of a "gay Christian."

But the Equality Ride does not practice the same principle and takes a few situations and applies them to the schools as a whole.

-Venari

[themattperry]

Perhaps you want to improve the overall attitude of the University in relation to your demographic. That's perfectly fine. I know there are some homophobic people at BYU, but an aggressive confrontation on our campus is only going to make that worse. You can blame it on them if you want, but don't get upset when you throw gasoline on a fire and it doesn't go out. Confrontation is not the way to go about it, and when your confrontation leads to more misunderstandings you will have no one to blame but yourselves. I know that you guys are stereotyped, but I also know that it is common for people who don't agree with homosexuality to be stereotyped as being homophobic. This is just as fallacious a generalization. I am not afraid of homosexuals; I am not threatened by them or opposed to equal rights; I'm all for gay marriage; but coming to my school to tell me that I am wrong and that I should be running my religion differently is overstepping toleration on your part. I will tolerate you till the ends of the earth, but please afford me the same right. You are just as welcome here as anyone else, and you will be expelled just as quickly for having sex as I will. Can you tolerate that much equality?

Meklelan,

I don't think it is the stated goal of SoulForce to get you to change your religion or your beliefs. The reason SF is visiting your campus, as I have pointed out elsewhere, is that you have a discriminatory rule on the books -- ie one that specifically bans homosexual practices (and, if I'm not mistaken, we are not just talking about sex here but other behaviours as well) over and above sexual contact outside of marraige which is seperately banned. If this provision first were missing from your policies, and glbt people were not singled out by this rule, then SF would not be visiting your campus.

As far as improving the climate at BYU, I agree with you -- SF's visit will not be enough. It's the community fo BYU that is responsible for that, and they should start by making a bold statement of inclusion: remove discriminatory policies from the books. This would send a clear signal to all glbt people at BYU that they are not going to be discriminated against by the college and that homophobia in all of its forms is not welcome at BYU.

I guess I just wonder why you are taking this so hard Mekelan ... No one has anything against you as a person or a person of faith. What SF seeks to expose is discrimination, and I don't think that there can be any question that a policy that singles out homosexual practices in particular is discriminatory. SF also seeks true dialog with anyone willing to talk The only confrontation sought is a confrontation with injustice and discrimination, not with you or anyone else personally, or with your faith. I think you'll find a very friendly,warm and strong bunch of people come to your campus in that bus.

My question to you Mekelan, is this: are you frustrated because you feel that SF is demanding that you change your beliefs? I simply don't think they are! Or are you frustrated, or even embarassed, that SF is exposing your College's discriminatory policy? In that case, why not join with them in calling for its removal?

-Matt

[closetcougar]

This rises a point. It that the stance at all the schools? Or for the sake of media attention are the leaders of the Equality Ride imposing that image on all the schools?
...there seems to be a disparity between what is said by the leaders of the Equality Ride and what is really going at these schools. So how can there be an honest claim to dialogue when it seems to be forced on the schools through the clever uses of misinformation… or to quote Orwell “doubletalk” and “doublethink.”
-Venari

Well, I go to BYU and graduate this year. Although that does not make my opinion an objective one by any means (I become more disillusioned everyday), I would go so far as to say that I doubt the SF ride will actually portray how bad it seems to me, to be. That is not to say that I don't think they will make a difference. I believe they will and I will be there to support them.

Maklelan,
You say that I would get kicked out just as fast as you for having gay or straight sex. It doesn't matter what is on the books (although what is on the books IS discriminatory). If I went to my bishop and told him that I had sex with someone of the same gender versus someone of the opposite gender, there are several possibilities, all of which do not favor the gay human being. He may or may not report me to the honor code office if I had sex with someone of the opposite gender, but if I had gay sex, I would be reported and kicked out in the same day!

You can hide behind official policy all you want, but it's like putting a label on a canister of uranium that says "does not cause cancer." Your views are just as much of an exception at BYU as I am.

[Daniel]

"closetcougar" You can hide behind official policy all you want, but it's like putting a label on a canister of uranium that says "does not cause cancer." Your views are just as much of an exception at BYU as I am."

Great Statement. Really sums matters up. Bravo!

[rennin1]

Paul Conn's attempt to stop Soulforce from gaining direct access to Lee University students simply shows how narrow-minded he is. I am a Christian and have been subjected to the dark side of Pentecostalism for most of my life. Everyone needs to know the real truth about this modern-day phenomenon. Far from being the wholesome, Christ-centered, family-valued movement they want us to believe, the movement is simply a vehicle for perpetuating religious bigotry from one generation to the next.

[BruceChris]

The original gay church, was a pentacostal. Well, at least until they kicked him out.
All in all, I think you're probably right.

Peace, Bruce Chris