Gay man denied a funeral

[Daniel]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/081007dnmetgayfuneral.3617689.html

This situation cries out for some kind of response.

[crm3]

It's things like these that make me feel ashamed to be a Christian. The church should be encouraging love between any people. After all isn't that what chritianity is supposedly all about? No, instead a few mistranslated and misinterpreted blble passages are taken to condemn an entire group of wondeful people. i'll never understand how people can be so cruel.

[Zerbie]

Those quotes are sickening. :mad: I'm livid - how DARE they tell a grieving family that photos of HUGGING are comparable to photos of a murder?!?!

That's utterly despicable and purely abusive of the grieving family. So they want to erase the man's entire life at the funeral? Like the funeral that became a thorough erasure of his entire existence?! And call it principle!
What liars. They should call it what it is. Evil.

[Daniel]

It's things like these that make me feel ashamed to be a Christian. The church should be encouraging love between any people. After all isn't that what chritianity is supposedly all about? No, instead a few mistranslated and misinterpreted blble passages are taken to condemn an entire group of wondeful people. i'll never understand how people can be so cruel.

It's all about love, as far as I can tell.

Know what got me? The fact that church sent over food and a video (minus the images that offended them), which, I imagine was a kind thing to do- according to their thinking.

Not so. It's not kind to slap people with one hand and then try to give to them with the other.

They call that a mixed message. Guess what people remember?

~

Addendum: According to the Mr. Sinclair's mother (see article below), there were no offensive pictures. And I for one believe her. That said- I don't consider a picture of two men kissing offensive. This tale is not about pictures. It's about homophobia.

[Zerbie]

Yes, very hurtful and insulting.

Does anyone think maybe we can collaborate on a letter to this church, maybe all sign it or something? I guess that's a question for SF staff - Jamie?!

[wmanion]

I would gladly sign a letter. I know how this hurts the family since we experienced it when my cousin died in the late 80's.

Bill

[glbt_equality]

I would gladly sign a letter. I know how this hurts the family since we experienced it when my cousin died in the late 80's.

Bill

I'd also be happy to sign such a letter. :-)

[RedneckDyke]

This story makes me very sad. That people would show so much judgment and hate to a family grieving the loss of a beloved brother. I hope that the man will be able to find another officiant for the funeral and another church to go to.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

AOL carries this article about the cancelled funeral arrangements:

http://news.aol.com/story/ar/_a/church-cancels-memorial-for-gay-vet/20070811110009990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

There's a poll connected with the article. When I took it almost 80 percent of folks were siding with the family against the church. Of course, the deceased is described in the poll as "a veteran"---how dare the church turn down a veteran!!

I don't view this action on the church's part as an act of hate. I think they are simply mistaken in their "principles." This is not so different from church's who deny LGBT people membership, or baptism or marriage---all those actions are hurtful, and are acts of spiritual violence. I think this was a particularly bad situation, adding more grief to an already grieving family.

Yes, writing a letter to the church would be appropriate. However, I think it would be equally appropriate for us all to recommit ourselves to the struggle to change the anti-LGBT policies of all the major denominations. This non-denominational mega-church can still point to all these major denominations and can say that their basic principles are consistent with the current "consensus" of major Christian denominations.

We need to go to the source of the Spiritual Violence---the ignorance and misinformation accepted by the majority of Christians and their institutions. If we don't want to see this kind of spiritual violence continue we need to take a stand.

Steven Webster

[Daniel]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070811/gay-funeral/


Church Cancels Memorial for Gay Navy Vet

ANGELA K. BROWN | August 11, 2007 05:45 AM EST |

ARLINGTON, Texas — A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay.

Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright. But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off.

"It's a slap in the face. It's like, 'Oh, we're sorry he died, but he's gay so we can't help you,'" she said Friday.

Wright said High Point offered to hold the service for Sinclair because their brother is a janitor there. Sinclair, who served in the first Gulf War, died Monday at age 46 from an infection after surgery to prepare him for a heart transplant.

The church's pastor, the Rev. Gary Simons, said no one knew Sinclair, who was not a church member, was gay until the day before the Thursday service, when staff members putting together his video tribute saw pictures of men "engaging in clear affection, kissing and embracing."

Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there.

"We did decline to host the service _ not based on hatred, not based on discrimination, but based on principle," Simons told The Associated Press. "Had we known it on the day they first spoke about it _ yes, we would have declined then. It's not that we didn't love the family."

Simons said the decision had nothing to do with the obituary. He said the church offered to pay for another site for the service, made the video and provided food for more than 100 relatives and friends.

"Even though we could not condone that lifestyle, we went above and beyond for the family through many acts of love and kindness," Simons said.

Wright called the church's claim about the pictures "a bold-faced lie." She said she provided numerous family pictures of Sinclair, including some with his partner, but said none showed men kissing or hugging.

The 5,000-member High Point Church was founded in 2000 by Simons and his wife, April, whose brother is Joel Osteen, well-known pastor of the 38,000-member Lakewood Church in Houston. Now High Point meets in a 432,000-square-foot facility in Arlington, near Dallas.

Wright said relatives declined the church's offer to hold the service at a community center because they felt it was an inappropriate venue. It ultimately was held at a funeral home, but the cancellation still lingered in some minds, she said.

[rainbow7]

Yes, very hurtful and insulting.

Does anyone think maybe we can collaborate on a letter to this church, maybe all sign it or something? I guess that's a question for SF staff - Jamie?!

I'm imagining that if I were a member of this family, it would mean something to me to receive letters from people, including total strangers, expressing support and love, and assuring me that this "church" did not speak for all Christians or for all faithful people. If I send a letter to the newspaper, do you think they will forward it to the family?

Polly

[keltic63]

working on some contact info....

here's the page with an obituary for Cecil Howard Sinclair (http://www.legacy.com/dfw/Obituaries.asp?Page=Notice&PersonID=92241608)

[rainbow7]

working on some contact info....

here's the page with an obituary for Cecil Howard Sinclair (http://www.legacy.com/dfw/Obituaries.asp?Page=Notice&PersonID=92241608)

oh, thanks. What about open letters to the paper?

[antonyh]

Yes, very hurtful and insulting.

Does anyone think maybe we can collaborate on a letter to this church, maybe all sign it or something? I guess that's a question for SF staff - Jamie?!

Great idea. A Soulforce action at this church would be great as well.

[Zerbie]

Great idea. A Soulforce action at this church would be great as well.

So. . . Jamie??? Any thoughts??

[keltic63]

working on some contact info....

here's the page with an obituary for Cecil Howard Sinclair (http://www.legacy.com/dfw/Obituaries.asp?Page=Notice&PersonID=92241608)

oh, thanks. What about open letters to the paper?

Friends, I have been in contact with Cecil Howard's mother, as well as his partner, Paul Wagner. I have their email addresses and will pm them to you at your request. I assured them that I would guard their privacy. I also want to note that Cecil's mother, Eva Bowers lived with the men and unfortunately is not in good health. Paul expressed to me his concern for her health. Paul continues to care for her in their home. (makes you want to cry, doesn't it?)

If you would like to send a letter by snail mail, Paul said that the author of the original article has received many at the newspaper and has forwarded them to the family.
contact info:

JEFFREY WEISS / The Dallas Morning News
jweiss@dallasnews.com
508 Young St.,
Dallas, TX 75202

more info on what exactly happened: http://religion.beloblog.com/archives/2007/08/another_side_of_the_story_of_t.html#more

[keltic63]

oops.....forgot to add this info from Paul Wagner:

Anyone wishing to contact the church can reach them at their website: www.churchunusual.com (http://www.churchunusual.com/) (no I'm not joking, that's their real web address.)

[keltic63]

Great idea. A Soulforce action at this church would be great as well.

At the church, perhaps, but Cecil Howard Sinclair's mother, Eva Bowers, does not wish to have a media circus in their neighborhood.

[kara speltz]

oops.....forgot to add this info from Paul Wagner:



Thanks Steve, I took time to write them about just how unchristian their actions were. kara

[Jamie McDaniel]

Those quotes are sickening. :mad: I'm livid - how DARE they tell a grieving family that photos of HUGGING are comparable to photos of a murder?!?!
I read that article and yeah, I was shocked at how a pastor (Gary Simons, brother-in-law of Joel Osteen) of a huge church could say something like that, not to a few fellow members and overheard by someone, mind you, but spoken directly to the media. Wow. A letter to him will not be effective as he's clearly clueless. (Note to Christians of goodwill -- you must stop giving these people your attendance, money, and loyalty. More on that below.)

It's not kind to slap people with one hand and then try to give to them with the other.

This is a great statement. I'm filing it away for when someone offers us water or a donut while supporting anti-gay policies and tries to play that off like Pastor Simons. What was it he said. Oh yeah, this:

"...we went above and beyond for the family through many acts of love and kindness," Simons said.

Acts of love towards the family, including this little comment about the deceased's mother:

Perhaps a mother who is a member of the church loses a son who is a thief or murderer, Mr. Simons said. "...I don't think the mother would submit photos of her son murdering someone," he said.

Someone obviously slept during Jesus 101.

Friends, I have been in contact with Cecil Howard's mother, as well as his partner, Paul Wagner. Nice work. Sometimes a phone call and a handful of personal letters can be more effective than a single letter with lots of signatures.

Now to add something. It would be remiss, I think, to not point to the anti-gay teachings, and then point to the anti-gay actions, and ask how people with LGBT loved ones were caught off guard. So many people who love and affirm their gay family members continue to feed both these mega-churches with their money and the egos of these pastors with their attendance.

My brother and sister-in-law delighted me by attending our wedding, but then, at the lunch following the ceremony, shared they were now happily involved with Lexington's largest church, which surprise, surprise, is very anti-gay. It caused a bit of a heated argument, because, well, when it comes to family, nonviolent, diplomatic, "let's investigate why" Jamie is slow to the draw, while WTF?! Jamie is quite swift.

Anyhow, this denial of a funeral is a sad case and kudos to the family for not accepting the church's offer of food and funeral hosting in exchange for silence. I'm just thinking about how good folks can stop giving these people opportunities to do this.

[Daniel]

oops.....forgot to add this info from Paul Wagner:



Great googling!

I sent a snail mail letter to the family.

[tdogg]

Just another example of so-called Christianity in the organized religious sense of the word. Truly not anything to do with the Love that Jesus taught. Sad, sad sad. :'(

[Steven E. Webster]

Folks,

I have to dissent from the opinion that we will end the spiritual violence of the Christian churches simply by withdrawing. I like Mel's witness of continuing to attend Falwell's church (while making his dissent known when appropriate.)

Equality Rider Joey Heath told us at the Reconciling Ministries Convocation last weekend that he was going to continue to attend the United Methodist Church that denied him membership, and he's bringing his boyfriend with him! I trust that Soulforce has trained him how to make his dissent known when appropriate and necessary.

As awful as it is, this case in Arlington, Texas is not at all unusual. There are plenty of Christians who think that this church was behaving in a perfectly understandable way. We won't disabuse them of their ignorant and mistaken belief that their spiritual violence is Godly unless we (and our family and friends) are in the pews raising a protest.

Jamie, I think it would have been appropriate to find ways to challenge your family members about the anti-gay church they are attending---what are they doing about the homophobia in that church? Maybe if they spoke up and got thrown out of the church, they'd learn something. Maybe if they stayed and continually challenged the anti-gay teaching, they might discover that others there agreed with them. I don't think it's wrong for them to attend this church--I think it's wrong if they do so while being silent when the church preaches homophobia.

I don't believe in giving financial support to an anti-gay church leadership--but one can designate one's church offerings to feed the hungry. I even am able to make designated gifts through my church to Soulforce (that can't happen everywhere). I'm sure it's true that my "wealth" is not much missed, but I have the peace of mind that I am not financially supporting my own oppression or that of others.

I think a lot of churches might change if friends and family of LGBT persons would stop being silent. However, if they just quietly leave the church, nothing will change there.

I'm going to buy a sympathy card and send it to the Arlington, Texas family.

Steven Webster

[Zerbie]

Both. Both what Jamie said and what Steven said, according to what each person feels they need to do according to their own style of expression. Staying and dissenting will help, but it will also help if many leave - NOT silently - leave, and state clearly WHY. If folks leave by the droves and many others stay and express dissent, that ought to start getting the churchs' attention.

[Steven E. Webster]

Both. Both what Jamie said and what Steven said, according to what each person feels they need to do according to their own style of expression. Staying and dissenting will help, but it will also help if many leave - NOT silently - leave, and state clearly WHY. If folks leave by the droves and many others stay and express dissent, that ought to start getting the churchs' attention.

I won't argue with you about the validity of both approaches (especially if one is not silent in either case). But if we believe both approaches are valid, then let's give real support to both approaches. As one who is staying and dissenting, I often feel too lonely. And, frankly, I'm not hearing much talk in the church about all those LGBT friendly folks who no longer attend--it's "out of sight and out of mind."

That said, I don't want to be scolding folks who've simply had enough battering from the church and need to find a more spiritually nurturing and supportive path--I just can't argue with that. At the same time I think of what that first Methodist and early abolitionist, John Wesley, wrote from his death bed to young Wilberforce who was just beginning his long campaign to end the British slave trade--"Do not grow weary in well-doing" (in more contemporary lingo, "don't let the bastards wear you down.")

Steven Webster

[Jennifer5]

I think a lot of churches might change if friends and family of LGBT persons would stop being silent. However, if they just quietly leave the church, nothing will change there.


I think there's a lot to that... it does work some of the time... people are just to scared to speak up.

[Jennifer5]

Both. Both what Jamie said and what Steven said, according to what each person feels they need to do according to their own style of expression. Staying and dissenting will help, but it will also help if many leave - NOT silently - leave, and state clearly WHY. If folks leave by the droves and many others stay and express dissent, that ought to start getting the churchs' attention.

It's happening slowly... but we have to keep going... the churches empty, but it'd be nice if more people knew why.


Steven, don't feel alone... fellow 'protesters' out there.. promise :love:

---

Back to the point...

Reading this makes me sick. :'(

I can see where from the eyes of this pastor they were doing the right thing, by making the offers they made. But not a single offer made came from the heart. This is the last thing this family needed to be dealing with in this hard time.

Plus you said that the grandmother (?) was not in good health...? is that right? My heart goes out to these people :'( :love:

---

I hear this of a christian church and promise to never become that.

[sailaway58]

I am not surprised at all that a conservative church would male this stand. To be disappointed would mean I expected something different to happen. These people aren't evil and I have spent my life with others much like them. We have a church in our county that split from the United Methodist denomination starting a new independent church because the UM denomination didn't take a hard enough stand against homosexuality. Their single common band of unity is homosexuality is a sin and they are standing against it.
When I talk to others about orientation the most common question is , "Well, what about pedophiles? is that their orientation?" I am pretty sick of the comparison.
So what the heck is my point?
I don't think that as I talk to others I will convince many that homosexuality in not a sin. 100% of the people that I talk to about it that are hardliner against it believe it is a choice.
Then you throw in bi and trans-gender and you make someones head explode!
What happened is wrong and I agree with kind support of the family but to launch an attack against the church will only strengthen their prejudice.
I like Steven's approach of staying and being a part of the church.
It would be harder for those that are openly gay and if you stay in a church that is anti-gay you better be living a Christ-like example among your friends there.
For me it is much easier because I can speak in theory and what ifs. I had a friend tell me last week if anyone else was telling him this stuff (homosexuality is overwhelmingly not a choice therefore not a sin) he would be angry.
Because it was me we had an open duologue.
The more Christians see homosexuals among them living a fruit bearing life, the more bridges we will see between us.
I can't pretend to know how events like these make some of you feel but I want to offer my friendship and let you know that there are some conservative Christians that are in the trenches with you.

[pnggrad79]

I wrote an email to the pastor of the church and told him he had an opportunity to show God's love for all people and chose not to. I like Steven's idea. If we as glbt people go to anti-gay churches, we in effect go sit at the lunch counter and not eat out back on the steps. I think it will be a powerful presence and show people that gay people do want to live a life of faith.

This was simply reprehensible what this church did to this family. It wasn't about the church, or their policies, it was about the family's wishes to honor and remember their son. This church used this man's death to proclaim to the world their hatred and misinformation. It was an embarrassment to them and one more example of how UNCHRISTIAN the church is today. :'(

[Progo35]

This is a very sad, tragic issue. Surely there needs to be greater collaboration between churches and the gay community to resolve issues like this. You know, I wonder if it wouldn't be a bad idea to try to from some sort of coalition between conservative Christains who see gay relationships as sinful and those that affirm them? Perhaps regular discussion in a forum that is specifically tailored to that issue would help.

Please keep us all apprised of further developments.

[keltic63]

Friends, I now have the snail mail address of Cecil Sinclair's sister. She is very appreciative of our concern. Again, I'll send it to you in a pm if you wish to send a note.



and I might mention that a few more of you could respond......it appeared that many of us wanted to send letters of support to the family, and well, I just haven't had too many requests for contact info.

[Jamie McDaniel]

(Note to Christians of goodwill -- you must stop giving these people your attendance, money, and loyalty. More on that below.)

So many people who love and affirm their gay family members continue to feed both these mega-churches with their money and the egos of these pastors with their attendance.

I have to dissent from the opinion that we will end the spiritual violence of the Christian churches simply by withdrawing.

Equality Rider Joey Heath told us at the Reconciling Ministries Convocation last weekend that he was going to continue to attend the United Methodist Church that denied him membership, and he's bringing his boyfriend with him!

Staying and dissenting will help, but it will also help if many leave - NOT silently - leave, and state clearly WHY.

...if we believe both approaches are valid, then let's give real support to both approaches. As one who is staying and dissenting, I often feel too lonely. And, frankly, I'm not hearing much talk in the church about all those LGBT friendly folks who no longer attend--it's "out of sight and out of mind."

Steven Webster is the the type of guy that if you were both passing in your homework and you happened to notice that he had a different answer for a question than you did, you would glance over at your eraser and, even if you would never cheat, you'd find yourself wanting to change your answer.

To further this discussion, I'll share another little story. One of the gay couples we sometimes hang out with once asked me to go with them to this Baptist church they were visiting where the pastor was "just a real nice man." These good guys (who introduced themselves as gay to the pastor) are a little more conservative I think than me, and when I said that I didn't know if I really wanted to sit through one of their services, Joseph replied that he could get a nugget of truth from almost anywhere.

That's certainly a valid point. It's even in the Soulforce beliefs about my adversary, stated as "My adversary may have an insight into truth that I do not have." But when I realized that this Baptist church was one of the more fundamentalist ones in town, I was like, no thanks, life is too short to be looking for nuggets in places where real precious metal hasn't been seen in decades and the people panning in the waters erupt into cheers over pyrite.

The struggle in the Methodist denomination, however, is a much different story from these fundamentalist churches and I absolutely support you and Joey (another great Soulforce guy) in your attendance of those churches.

...it appeared that many of us wanted to send letters of support to the family, and well, I just haven't had too many requests for contact info.

Thanks for the reminder, Steve. More people sending cards of support will counteract the message the church sent by denying the funeral at the last minute. I'm dropping this card in the mail along with a note thanking them for not accepting the church's offer in exchange for their silence about their loved one.

[Daniel]

The paster of the church that is....

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-churchfolo_13met.ART.State.Edition1.4200cfb.html

Arlington church defends decision not to host gay man's funeral
Arlington: Refusal of gay man's service based on church policy, not discrimination, pastor says
12:00 AM CDT on Monday, August 13, 2007

By JASON TRAHAN / The Dallas Morning News
jtrahan@dallasnews.com
ARLINGTON – The pastor of Arlington's High Point Church told his congregation Sunday that he stood by the church's decision to retract an offer to host a memorial service for a gay man, prompting applause from the hundreds in the crowd.

"With all the negative e-mail we are receiving right now, it seems that the homosexual community, God bless them all, are very organized," said the Rev. Gary Simons, referring to the reaction to the church's decision, which has generated news coverage around the world and lighted up gay and religious blogs.

"Before, when you type in 'Gary Simons' and 'High Point Church' in a Google search, you know, you could find us. But now, you really could find us."

Mr. Simons, the brother-in-law of Joel Osteen of the nationally known Lakewood Church in Houston, stood firm Sunday in his explanation of why High Point Church canceled the memorial service for Cecil Sinclair, 46, on Wednesday, a day before it was scheduled to take place at the church in southern Arlington.

He said that that the nondenominational church did not realize until the last minute that Mr. Sinclair, a Navy veteran who served in the Persian Gulf War, was gay and that his homosexuality would be mentioned at the service.

Although the two sides still disagree about what led to the offer being withdrawn, the service that ended up being held at an Arlington funeral home celebrated Mr. Sinclair's life and his relationships. His friends and family spoke of their pride in Mr. Sinclair "just as he was."

Church officials said they could not have hosted a service that condoned those sentiments.

"This decision was not based on hate, or discrimination, but upon principle and policy," Mr. Simons said Sunday to cheers from the congregation. "We cannot glorify homosexuality as a lifestyle."

Brian Ware, 32, said he was satisfied with the pastor's explanation after hearing it Sunday morning. "The Bible does say it's wrong," he said. "You wouldn't go to someone's house who doesn't smoke and smoke there."

The church had been praying for Mr. Sinclair's recovery from heart problems for six years at the behest of Mr. Sinclair's mentally disabled brother, who works as a janitor at the church and is also a member.

Members of his family, however, say that it wasn't until Mr. Sinclair's obituary mentioned that he had a life partner that they got a call that the memorial service was canceled,

Mr. Sinclair, who died Aug. 6 from an infection while waiting on a heart transplant, was not a member of the church. His family donated his body to science.

The family says that it should have been obvious to church staff immediately that Mr. Sinclair was gay. They say that Paul Wagner, 38, was introduced to a High Point audio-visual minister, who came to the hospital on Monday night, as the deceased's partner.

The fact that the family wanted the Turtle Creek Chorale, an openly gay and internationally famous group that Mr. Sinclair sang with for years, to perform should also have made it obvious, they say.

"I have fought for their right to hate me," said Mr. Wagner, a 16-year Army veteran who served in the Gulf War. "My only problem is how they used all those excuses before canceling the offer. If they had been upfront, we'd have been ticked, but we would have moved on."

The family also disputes Mr. Simon's statement last week that "very strong homosexual images of kissing and hugging" were among photos relatives submitted for a church-produced memorial slideshow. A CD of the photos the family says it gave the church does not include such images.

Mr. Simons did not address this point Sunday.

He did say, however, that the family "requested an open-microphone format to allow anyone in attendance to speak" and chose someone outside High Point to direct the service. "It appeared to the church staff that the family was requesting an openly homosexual service at High Point Church, which is not our policy to allow."

Tim Seelig, the longtime conductor of the Turtle Creek Chorale who led Mr. Sinclair's memorial service, said he was never contacted by High Point staff about his plans.

"They never asked what we were going to sing," said Dr. Seelig, who was a Baptist music minister before becoming leader of Turtle Creek two decades ago. "And 'Amazing Grace' – that's hardy a gay pride rally song. I'm real clear as to what is appropriate at a church memorial service and what is not."

At the end of the hourlong memorial service, Dr. Seelig addressed the controversy.

"We were supposed to be a couple of blocks away," he told the mourners. "We are here because the church deemed Cecil unworthy."

By their works shall you know them....

[Zerbie]

The paster of the church that is....

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-churchfolo_13met.ART.State.Edition1.4200cfb.html



By their works shall you know them....

Remind me never again to open threads like this during my PMS phase: I'm so livid right now I'm crying and can hardly sit still. If this Simons character were here in my house right now he'd be getting such an earful it would NOT be non-violent at all; this just makes me want to rant and call names. How can ANYONE justify this incredibly sickening behavior as "principle"?!? In addition to which they include the usual slams against the perceived vastly organized homosexual agenda-ists. They sound as anti-gay as you can get, dressed up with a candy outside so you don't know what they're hiding on the inside.

That hundreds could applaud such sick and immoral behavior is even more sickening.

I'll have to refrain from saying more, since I haven't seen much of my cheery or placid persona since the dentist office screw-up 10 days ago, so I've been just pissy pissy pissy - this could put me over the top.

All I can say is, their twisted, inhumane, cruel, and nearly evil behavior fits right in to the definition I've always held of "christians."

Ha! Just last night I was thinking that there didn't seem to be so much homophobia any more. Every time I don't see some for a while, I think there's less of it out there. This just ticked me off.

[Blockwell]

I saw this bit of news a few nights ago on national television. The news clip was accompanied with a photo of Gary Simons. (Below)

You’ll have to excuse me if I can’t hear you. My gaydar is ringing quite loudly at the moment. He’s just too precious for words.

[Emproph]

First, Soulforce Responds to Cancellation of Gay Navy Vet's Memorial (http://www.soulforce.org/article/1293) 8-13-07
~~
You’ll have to excuse me if I can’t hear you. My gaydar is ringing quite loudly at the moment. He’s just too precious for words.Meow. Either that or the evil villian guy from those silent movies. http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u103/4rileylovesclay2/Smilies/lol-1.gif
~~

And then this article entitled Eyes wide shut (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/5054460.html) gave me a thought. It basically just put the article Daniel quoted into better context.
It seems incredible that no one at Arlington's High Point Church saw the obvious: that Cecil Sinclair, a dying 46-year-old Desert Storm veteran awaiting a heart transplant, was gay.

The church had reached out to Sinclair in his illness because his brother was a janitor and a church congregant. While Sinclair was in the hospital, High Point's audio-visual minister met Sinclair's life partner. When Sinclair died,church officials knew the Turtle Creek Chorale, a gay men's chorus, had been asked to sing at the funeral.
And from the article Daniel posted above:
The church had been praying for Mr. Sinclair's recovery from heart problems for six years at the behest of Mr. Sinclair's mentally disabled brother, who works as a janitor at the church and is also a member.
On top of everything else, 6 years and nobody knew that his brother was gay, and if they did, nobody spread the news far and wide that his brother was committing the "worst sin" on Earth?

Then Reverend Precious has the opportunity to deny and explain accusations of LIES, and not only does not, but takes the opportunity to joke about their listing on Google? What an additional slap in the face to this family. Heaping on the grief in the name of Jesus.

In regard to the 'villian' characterization, apparently the shoe fits.
"With all the negative e-mail we are receiving right now, it seems that the homosexual community, God bless them all, are very organized," said the Rev. Gary SimonsRead: "Homosexual agenda"

What an asshole.

[elcharrom]

Sad thing is, none of it is surpirising anymore =\

[mjules]

Every now and then, people make me nauseated.

Well, hm. In the interest of being very specific and non-judgmental: People's decisions to put aside human decency and compassion in favor of their own recreated morality code make me nauseated. I'm sure I'd like the people themselves if I could get past choices like that.

Because you know, whether or not you believe that homosexuality is a choice, I think everyone can agree that being a jerk IS.

*sighs*

I miss (the corporeal) Jesus. We need more people like him in the world.

[u-dog]

I miss (the corporeal) Jesus. We need more people like him in the world.

Well... That is sort of the whole REAL point of Christianity isn't it? to make a bunch more people who behave like Jesus? Why do so many so-called christians get derailed?

[Steven E. Webster]

Well... That is sort of the whole REAL point of Christianity isn't it? to make a bunch more people who behave like Jesus? Why do so many so-called christians get derailed?

Could it be - - - SATAN ! ?

Steven Webster

[u-dog]

Could it be - - - SATAN ! ?

Steven Webster


If such a creature exists, which I sometimes think he does and sometimes think he does not, The less said about him the better. People get derailed from focusing on and emulating Jesus by THINKING about Satan.

When we were teaching one of our kids to ride a bike we discovered that he had this alarming tendency to run headlong into lamp poles. Over and over again he would do it. It was like he had a lamp pole magnet mounted on the front of his bike.

Then we realized that he was so AFRAID of hitting the lamp pole that he couldn't take his eyes off of it. and of course his bike went where his eyes were pointing. When he learned to keep his eye on the goal (staying on the sidewalk) he went TOWARD the goal. The same is true of Satan. Keep your eye on him and you will go toward him. Keep your eye on Jesus and you will go toward him. ;)

[keltic63]

If such a creature exists, which I sometimes think he does and sometimes think he does not, The less said about him the better. People get derailed from focusing on and emulating Jesus by THINKING about Satan.

When we were teaching one of our kids to ride a bike we discovered that he had this alarming tendency to run headlong into lamp poles. Over and over again he would do it. It was like he had a lamp pole magnet mounted on the front of his bike.

Then we realized that he was so AFRAID of hitting the lamp pole that he couldn't take his eyes off of it. and of course his bike went where his eyes were pointing. When he learned to keep his eye on the goal (staying on the sidewalk) he went TOWARD the goal. The same is true of Satan. Keep your eye on him and you will go toward him. Keep your eye on Jesus and you will go toward him. ;)


having been delivered from the AoG, I can recall so many times that people actually addressed Satan. For a while, I bought into that teaching, that we have the power and authority to bind, etc. I occasionally hear someone make this reference now and it just baffles me to no end. If we believe in Satan, why give him any power by even addressing him? Like you, u-dog, I vacillate on my belief in such evil personified. I've been in church services where it seems that satan's characteristics are mentioned as much, if not more, than those of God.

[Steven E. Webster]

Could it be - - - SATAN ! ?

Steven Webster

Sorry, folks! This was one of those rare instances where I was trying to be humorous.

Remember Saturday Nite Live's Church Lady?

If there were a Satan, wouldn't he be delighted about us getting distracted by him? When one considers the human tendency towards self-deception, there seems to be little need for Satan except as a personification of our perverseness.

Steven Webster

[Zerbie]

If such a creature exists, which I sometimes think he does and sometimes think he does not, The less said about him the better. People get derailed from focusing on and emulating Jesus by THINKING about Satan.

When we were teaching one of our kids to ride a bike we discovered that he had this alarming tendency to run headlong into lamp poles. Over and over again he would do it. It was like he had a lamp pole magnet mounted on the front of his bike.

Then we realized that he was so AFRAID of hitting the lamp pole that he couldn't take his eyes off of it. and of course his bike went where his eyes were pointing. When he learned to keep his eye on the goal (staying on the sidewalk) he went TOWARD the goal. The same is true of Satan. Keep your eye on him and you will go toward him. Keep your eye on Jesus and you will go toward him. ;)


YES!!!!

That's exactly how it works. The bicycle story is a perfect analogy.

It's why sometimes I feel a need to rupture the mental investment in engaging with the adversary. Instead of engaging directly with anti-gay adversaries, take a third path by focusing on how you want to be, how you want to be, what you want to have happen. . . .

On the other hand, the closest energy I know to a "satan" does occasionally necessitate saying a firm "no." A few times I have had to do that in my life. It's scary, and it's rare, and you really have to focus on the positive and uplifting stuff. I agree that it's better *not* thought about or looked at. If it rears up, unfortunately, then one firm "no" is needed.

[keltic63]

Sorry, folks! This was one of those rare instances where I was trying to be humorous.

Remember Saturday Nite Live's Church Lady?

If there were a Satan, wouldn't he be delighted about us getting distracted by him? When one considers the human tendency towards self-deception, there seems to be little need for Satan except as a personification of our perverseness.

Steven Webster

I got the reference, but was also thinking of the people who use Satan as an excuse, and others who seem preoccupied with such a personification.

[u-dog]

Sorry, folks! This was one of those rare instances where I was trying to be humorous.

Remember Saturday Nite Live's Church Lady?

If there were a Satan, wouldn't he be delighted about us getting distracted by him? When one considers the human tendency towards self-deception, there seems to be little need for Satan except as a personification of our perverseness.

Steven Webster


AMen brother Steven!!

[tdogg]

Maybe those who spend so much energy on "Satan" are so afraid of the inadequacy of their own salvation, that to even look like they may be supporting something that they are supposed to be so against, could lead them to hell.

There is a prevailing argument amongst many Christians - whether or not 'salavation' is permanent, or could be lost. It's a fear based belief, and their reactions and thoughts are similiarly based in fear. Hence, the concentration on "Satan" versus "Jesus".

All they need to do is concentrate on Jesus and his teachings, and all the other stuff would go away, don't you think? Anyway, well said U and Steven!!

[BrentRichards]

Because you know, whether or not you believe that homosexuality is a choice, I think everyone can agree that being a jerk IS.


I feel a t-shirt coming on ...

[BrentRichards]

Sorry, folks! This was one of those rare instances where I was trying to be humorous.

Remember Saturday Nite Live's Church Lady?

If there were a Satan, wouldn't he be delighted about us getting distracted by him? When one considers the human tendency towards self-deception, there seems to be little need for Satan except as a personification of our perverseness.

Steven Webster

How did I miss that reference, that is totally my era! Wow, memories.

I'll also weigh in on the literal Satan issue with my favorite (and most profound) theological answer: Uh, I dunno.

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

I did send a sympathy card to Cecil's family. Today I got a very nice Thank You card in return. It said, in part, "I have been delightfully amazed at the human kindness we've been touched by since Cecil's sudden death and the church's rejection."

Steven Webster

[Emproph]

And just in case we're wrong about what God said, we can blame it on Satan.

[mjules]

The discussion about satan - and I, too, was delivered from the AoG church, along with several other denominations... - made me think of my weekend. I spent my day off (Saturday) volunteering at Pride Charlotte. My parents came (I'm so proud of them! :love:) and while my Dad couldn't take the summer heat very long, my Mom stayed for quite a while.

Up until then, my Mom hadn't believed there was much persecution and discrimination toward the LGBT community (she works in a very LGBT-friendly environment), but there were, of course, the handful of requisite protesters. She kept wanting to go up to them and argue them - not only were they rude, they were blatantly misquoting the Bible, which was making me itchy because I'm an accuracy-freak - but I had to stop her and tell her that, in our volunteer training, we were told to simply ignore the protesters. Don't make eye contact, don't speak to them, don't touch them, don't take any of their materials. If they harass us, to go to the Peace Enforcers instantly. It was sort of difficult to do, because I was trained in persuasive speech and debate, and there were so many holes and flaws in their logic I knew I could decimate them in a fair rhetoric fight, but we stuck with the training and simply avoided them.

That reminds me a lot of what y'all were saying about the issue of satan, and how some denominations would have you waste your time debating and arguing and commanding, when, in reality, it will only use up your energy in fruitless ways. Better to get on with the joy of being alive and the challenge of following Love up those steep slopes than stopping and yelling at the hecklers.

(For the record, there were plenty of nice churches who were set up around... MCC Charlotte was handing out pins saying "Would Jesus discriminate?" and the Revolution Church of Charlotte - the ones founded by Jay Bakker - were there handing out love all around with stickers that said, "Equality is a morality issue," plus several others.)

And Brent - hee, that could make a cute t-shirt. Maybe I should set up shop at CafePress and start selling shirt designs.

[mister e]

On top of everything else, 6 years and nobody knew that his brother was gay, and if they did, nobody spread the news far and wide that his brother was committing the "worst sin" on Earth?



This is mighty strange for a first post, I suppose, but I was wondering. I understand that the church had been sending visitors to the man, and presumably his partner and family, during his protracted illness. They had been sending food, and support, and all that, and maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I was thinking that they didn't consider the man's being homosexual until the family wanted to celebrate it at his funeral. I mean, maybe it just didn't cross their minds ("hey that fellow is in the hospital, why don't we send our ministers out there, etc.") and they didn't notice. What do you think?

[Emproph]

On top of everything else, 6 years and nobody knew that his brother was gay, and if they did, nobody spread the news far and wide that his brother was committing the "worst sin" on Earth?This is mighty strange for a first post, I suppose, but I was wondering. I understand that the church had been sending visitors to the man, and presumably his partner and family, during his protracted illness. They had been sending food, and support, and all that, and maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I was thinking that they didn't consider the man's being homosexual until the family wanted to celebrate it at his funeral.

First of all, the fact that you would characterize the family "celebrating" his homosexuality at his funeral strikes me as virulently ignorant at best on your part, as it's already been covered, repeatedly, and even from my post that you quoted from.

I am perfectly willing to believe that the family are the lying degenerates that you portray them to be, I would just ask that you use reasons facts and examples to portray them as such, instead of furtive innuendo -- as underlined and emboldened in the quote above.

I mean, maybe it just didn't cross their minds ("hey that fellow is in the hospital, why don't we send our ministers out there, etc.") and they didn't notice. What do you think?

Unless the family went out of their way to disparage the church by "celebrating" (which you have yet to define and validate) their loved one's homosexuality, then your issue is irrelevant.

Because at that point, to me, what you're saying, is that the only thing the church could have done wrong, was to allow the public to KNOW about their holding the funeral of a homosexual.

It sounds to me like you think it was ok for High Point Church to hold a funeral for a homosexual, just as long as nobody knew about it. -- Despite the Church's claim that it was about homosexuality, and NOT because it became public knowledge.

Does that make any sense myster e?

[mister e]

First of all, the fact that you would characterize the family "celebrating" his homosexuality at his funeral strikes me as virulently ignorant at best on your part, as it's already been covered, repeatedly, and even from my post that you quoted from.


Well, no, I wasn't saying that it was bad for his family to want to celebrate his life. His homosexuality, and his partner, was clearly a major part of his life. I mean, I don't buy the part about them wanting to show pictures of them "hugging and kissing" like some people have reported, but I also think that they probably did wish to celebrate a part of his life that made him happy, along with everything else in his life. I mean, if a man had died, and he really enjoyed aviation and loved his wife, they would probably show pictures of he and his wife smiling at a wedding anniversary, or even smiling as they stood by his plane. That's all I meant by "celebrating", I meant it only in the sense that a funeral is a celebration of someone's life.


I am perfectly willing to believe that the family are the lying degenerates that you portray them to be, I would just ask that you use reasons facts and examples to portray them as such, instead of furtive innuendo -- as underlined and emboldened in the quote above.

No, I don't think his family did anything wrong. I don't think they ever tried to hide from the church that the man was a homosexual. My point was that the church didn't notice the man's sexual orientation, because they were sharing compassion by sending ministers (the audio-visual fellow you mentioned) and food, and what not.


Unless the family went out of their way to disparage the church by "celebrating" (which you have yet to define and validate) their loved one's homosexuality, then your issue is irrelevant.

Because at that point, to me, what you're saying, is that the only thing the church could have done wrong, was to allow the public to KNOW about their holding the funeral of a homosexual.

I don't think the family went out of their way to do anything. I just think that they wanted to do what anyone does at a funeral, celebrate a life. I think I validated it up there, but if not, all I meant by "celebrate" was that they wanted to celebrate his life, which included his homosexuality. I think your point about the church is somewhat counterintuitive, because the public was going to know if they did and know if they didn't. If they had gone ahead with the funeral as planned, the public in that area would have definitely known about it. As it stands, the public definitely knows that they didn't allow the funeral. So I don't think it had anything to do with whether or not the public knew about it, because it doesn't sound like the pastor cares what the public thinks, only what his congregation thinks.


It sounds to me like you think it was ok for High Point Church to hold a funeral for a homosexual, just as long as nobody knew about it. -- Despite the Church's claim that it was about homosexuality, and NOT because it became public knowledge.

Does that make any sense myster e?

I was wondering if anyone had considered that the minister might not have known he was a homosexual, because he was sending other ministers and so on to the family during the illness. I mean if the man truly hated homosexuals, and refused a funeral on only that, wouldn't he also refuse hospital visitation towards the man? My question was, maybe the pastor didn't care the man's orientation, and was willing to show compassion while the man was in the hospital anyway?

[Emproph]

I was wondering if anyone had considered that the minister might not have known he was a homosexual, because he was sending other ministers and so on to the family during the illness.

I mean if the man truly hated homosexuals, and refused a funeral on only that, wouldn't he also refuse hospital visitation towards the man?

My question was, maybe the pastor didn't care the man's orientation, and was willing to show compassion while the man was in the hospital anyway?

So we should be grateful for his conditional love?
Ok, I'm grateful. Next.

I'll give you pretty much everything you've asked, but the issue here is the dishonesty of not only how the situation was handled by church underlings, but also of Rev. Simons' response (at sermon) in regard to their handling of the situation. Namely in pointing blame at the response to it.

(ergo; 'those homosexuals sure prove our point in having f****d the familiy over - because their son/partner was one of them!').

Clearly I have enough of the man's own words to show that he is of the devil.

So what exactly is your issue with this?

And btw, I do appreciate you gracious responses to my flippancy.

[mister e]

So we should be grateful for his conditional love?
Ok, I'm grateful. Next.

I'll give you pretty much everything you've asked, but the issue here is the dishonesty of not only how the situation was handled by church underlings, but also of Rev. Simons' response (at sermon) in regard to their handling of the situation. Namely in pointing blame at the response to it.

(ergo; 'those homosexuals sure prove our point in having fucked the familiy over - because their son/partner was one of them!').

Clearly I have enough of the man's own words to show that he is of the devil.

So what exactly is your issue with this?

And btw, I do appreciate you gracious responses to my flippancy.

I wouldn't say I have an issue, really. I was just sort of thinking about a different outlook on it. I mean if it was up to me, I would just had the funeral, because it can't be a bad thing to respect a man, regardless of your beliefs on homosexuality. I mean I think at least they could have worked together to come up with some kind of compromise that didn't include booting them out of the church. I mean I know the church still paid for the food, and the rent of the facility down the street, and all of the rest of that stuff, and since they did, I didn't see a reason why they couldn't just go ahead and have it at the church. I mean they pretty much paid for everything anyway, so why not just let them have it there?

That's why it seems fishy to me that they suddenly decided not to have it at the church. I really feel like they didn't realize he was gay until they heard about the choir, and received the pictures for the slideshow and all that. I guess it just didn't cross their minds to ask whether the fellow they were visiting in the hospital was gay or not, only that he was a man in need of their assistance, with family ties to their church. It was only after they had already offered to pay for food, and to officiate the service did they realize that he was gay, and that they didn't want to have something that gave the appearance that they advocated homosexuality in the church. Once they realized he was gay, and that the celebration of his homosexuality would be a part of the service did they decide not to have it, and to pay the rent for another location. It seems to me that they weren't being malicious about it, it's just that they were following typical church protocol, until they realized he was gay, then they changed. I was picking up from you that you felt like they knew he was gay all along, and that they would help him and do everything for him until it became public (the funeral) and then they dropped their support. I may be too optimistic, but that's I saw it differently. I very well could be mistaken.

[Emproph]

[BIG SNIP]
I may be too optimistic, but that's I saw it differently. I very well could be mistaken.

So be it. You can have All that.

It seems to me then that the issue is about the fact that the Church was not prepared for the situation.

Again, so be it. I truly did not consider this as a concern. I'll assume you can understand why.

However, I can very much appreciate the trauma of an unexpected occurrence, no matter what the circumstances or situation may be.

Is this the message you wish to relay?

And I don't mean that flippantly, it is well received.

[keltic63]

I wouldn't say I have an issue, really. I was just sort of thinking about a different outlook on it. I mean if it was up to me, I would just had the funeral, because it can't be a bad thing to respect a man, regardless of your beliefs on homosexuality. I mean I think at least they could have worked together to come up with some kind of compromise that didn't include booting them out of the church. I mean I know the church still paid for the food, and the rent of the facility down the street, and all of the rest of that stuff, and since they did, I didn't see a reason why they couldn't just go ahead and have it at the church. I mean they pretty much paid for everything anyway, so why not just let them have it there?

That's why it seems fishy to me that they suddenly decided not to have it at the church. I really feel like they didn't realize he was gay until they heard about the choir, and received the pictures for the slideshow and all that. I guess it just didn't cross their minds to ask whether the fellow they were visiting in the hospital was gay or not, only that he was a man in need of their assistance, with family ties to their church. It was only after they had already offered to pay for food, and to officiate the service did they realize that he was gay, and that they didn't want to have something that gave the appearance that they advocated homosexuality in the church. Once they realized he was gay, and that the celebration of his homosexuality would be a part of the service did they decide not to have it, and to pay the rent for another location. It seems to me that they weren't being malicious about it, it's just that they were following typical church protocol, until they realized he was gay, then they changed. I was picking up from you that you felt like they knew he was gay all along, and that they would help him and do everything for him until it became public (the funeral) and then they dropped their support. I may be too optimistic, but that's I saw it differently. I very well could be mistaken.

Please click on the links that I posted earlier in this thread. It is clear that the church was not mistaken, nor were they ignorant of this man's orientation. Each step of the way, lies were told to cover up previous lies. It seems that this is pretty clearly documented.

[mister e]

Please click on the links that I posted earlier in this thread. It is clear that the church was not mistaken, nor were they ignorant of this man's orientation. Each step of the way, lies were told to cover up previous lies. It seems that this is pretty clearly documented.

Well, I've read up on the story, including your links, and all I find is that the fellow's sister says that they knew he was gay the whole time, while the pastor claims that they didn't realize it until the obituary said "life partner" and they started putting together the slideshow/video for the funeral. What I am saying is that it is not unreasonable that they wouldn't even be curious as to the man's orientation while he was sick. Best I can tell, they are one of those mega-church deals where they have thousands upon thousands of members. My thought is that they just heard that he was ailing, added him to the prayer list, and sent their visiting minister to visit him without giving a second thought about it. They knew that the family would need assistance (because the fellow's brother was a church janitor) so they offered to help, like a church would, and it was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened, I suppose. I mean, I don't notice people's homosexuality when I meet them, and I probably wouldn't even if I visited a person in the hospital. It just isn't something that I think to question, you know.

[andrewlittle]

Well, I've read up on the story, including your links, and all I find is that the fellow's sister says that they knew he was gay the whole time, while the pastor claims that they didn't realize it until the obituary said "life partner" and they started putting together the slideshow/video for the funeral. What I am saying is that it is not unreasonable that they wouldn't even be curious as to the man's orientation while he was sick. Best I can tell, they are one of those mega-church deals where they have thousands upon thousands of members. My thought is that they just heard that he was ailing, added him to the prayer list, and sent their visiting minister to visit him without giving a second thought about it. They knew that the family would need assistance (because the fellow's brother was a church janitor) so they offered to help, like a church would, and it was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened, I suppose. I mean, I don't notice people's homosexuality when I meet them, and I probably wouldn't even if I visited a person in the hospital. It just isn't something that I think to question, you know.

Hi mister e,

When I see a discussion like this, I try to determine what is at stake. I have read your posts and I am left with thinking, "So What?" What point, succinctly, are you trying to make, and why is it so important that you have expended so much effort on it? There appears to be something I'm missing, and I haven't been able to find it yet. Can you help me do that?

[Zerbie]

t was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened, I suppose. I mean, I don't notice people's homosexuality when I meet them, and I probably wouldn't even if I visited a person in the hospital. It just isn't something that I think to question, you know.

Speaking for myself, this paragraph, and boiled down to its essence, the part I put in bold, are what I take to be mister's point to make.

I'm sure when he comes back he will clarify if this is or is not in fact the point that motivated him to join the discussion.

I've been of the impression all along that the church officials found out the deceased was gay after the funeral had been offered. I don't know, but that's my impression.

That the offer was rescinded upon discovery of the deceased's orientation is HARDLY "just a more optimistic outlook," to the contrary, it is the cornerstone of the problem. As soon as those church officials learned that the man was gay, and had had a loving partnership that the family deemed worthy of recognition (thank God!), they rescinded their offer to host a funeral. Because they objected to his family relationships!! Nothing could be a greater slap in the face to all that Christ is and was and stood for than an action like that. Stories like this are the reason you cannot get me inside a church unless you're paying me to walk through the door.

[tdogg]

If the deceased's family was open to celebrating his life including his life with his partner, then I can't imagine the knowledge that this young man had a same sex partner would have been hidden during his illness and hospitalization. As long as the church's support included visits outside the church then perhaps the thought was the support would be seen as a Christian act of kindness. Once the issue was going to be brought into the church, those in charge (of/at the church) clammed up and said no.

Going out is seen as the charity, bringing it in would be seen as condoning the man's life with his partner. Huge difference in the religious fundamental circle.

As far as the family wanting pictures of their loved one with his partner, kissing and hugging, what difference would that make? I'd say explicit pics would be out of line (who would do that anyway), but please - pics of the couple together being affectionate??? If it wouldn't have been an issue were the couple heterosexual, then it shouldn't make a difference here either. And therein lies the true meaning of our struggle for equality. We aren't looking for anything special. We only want the SAME rights, priviledge and protections as the next (straight) person.

[Emproph]

It seems to me then that the issue is about the fact that the Church was not prepared for the situation.

I can very much appreciate the trauma of an unexpected occurrence, no matter what the circumstances or situation may be.

Is this the message you wish to relay? ..and it was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened...

I'll take that as a yes. Which validates this perception:

I have read your posts and I am left with thinking, "So What?" What point, succinctly, are you trying to make, and why is it so important that you have expended so much effort on it? There appears to be something I'm missing, and I haven't been able to find it yet. Can you help me do that?
And this perception:
Speaking for myself, this paragraph, and boiled down to its essence, the part I put in bold, are what I take to be mister's point to make.It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened

The only reason I may be accepting this is because of mister e's gentle nature of explaining it, but it is an important consideration that I haven't yet seen elucidated so fully.

To be clear, I take it as no more than a glorified 'gay-panic' defense in mega-church-mentality. A reason, not an excuse, that may help to explain their behavior.

Given what mister e has shared, I can envision a person, or church, taking on the Christian role of ministering to those in need, without judgement.

Especially in the sense of the anti-gay context/climate. They would be able to think of themselves as not being "anti-gay," because hey, they aren't judging the homosexual persons they DO minister to.

How can I be anti-gay, I have gay friends, I even minister to them?

As the adage goes though, you find out who your friends are when the going gets tough. Which matches with the Family's account of events. Being that it was when the obituary appeared that the church had a change of heart.

IOW, it was ok for them to be "gay-friendly" - as long as nobody knew about it. Because before anyone knew they were being friendly to this gay couple and their family, they were just being Christian. Once people found out about it however, then it was all about the fact that they were supporting the "homosexual lifestyle" and therefore the "homosexual agenda."

IOW again, they weren't prepared to be found out as the actual Christians they were. And once found out -- via his obituary -- they panicked and pre-emptively succumbed to anti-gay peer pressure.

The important part that I think mister e may have been trying to say is that they truly wanted to be Christian, meaning that at heart they wanted to be unconditionally loving, to this gay man and his partner and family. Something that is insignificant at this point given their despicable behavior in their handling and public response to the situation, but important to recognize none the less.

It reminds me of a quote, I think By Thea Alexander, "You are your thoughts to you, but you are your behavior to others."

Also, Mel White and others here speak of how "they are sincere, just sincerely misguided." Which always pisses me off because it in essense confuses the situation. Murderers can be "sincere," but this situation, as mister e has described it, may help to explain how one, or a group, can be sincere at heart, and then behave despicably insincerely, seemingly at the same time.

Is this what you were trying to get at mister e?

[mister e]

Hello again-

I think what I'm driving at is not that they wanted to help the gay gentlemen when no one knew that they were gay, but that they really didn't care what the orientation of the fellow was when they were ministering to him. That's why I believe they didn't notice that he was gay until later.

It seems to me that they would not have offered the funeral to the family if they had known he was gay when they offered. It seems like they probably didn't think twice until they put 2 and 2 together and realized that he was gay. So yes, they were ministering to him, as Christians supposedly should, without really questioning whether he was gay or not (like I said in another post, I just don't notice people's sexual orientation by looking at them, and frankly it makes no difference to me). They might have thought that he was gay, but they thought it had no bearing on their ministry so they didn't ask. Only when they realized the funeral would have open celebration of the man's life with his partner, did they change plans. I do agree that they caved once they realized he was gay, but they had already made a promise, so instead of hosting it, they paid the rent for the funeral home where the funeral was held instead.

I find it hard to fault the church, after they paid for everything, and simply felt that a celebration of homosexuality, even as a part of someone's life, was not something they wanted to have in their church. It's really sad, but at the same time, they have to stand for what they profess to believe. To me, paying for the other location, paying for all the food, and ministering to the man while he was sick was indicative of a truly caring church, even if they follow a strict biblical worldview concerning homosexuality.

[Emproph]

Is this what you were trying to get at mister e?Hello again-

I think what I'm driving at is not that they wanted to help the gay gentlemen when no one knew that they were gay, but that they really didn't care what the orientation of the fellow was when they were ministering to him. That's why I believe they didn't notice that he was gay until later.

It seems to me that they would not have offered the funeral to the family if they had known he was gay when they offered. It seems like they probably didn't think twice until they put 2 and 2 together and realized that he was gay. So yes, they were ministering to him, as Christians supposedly should, without really questioning whether he was gay or not (like I said in another post, I just don't notice people's sexual orientation by looking at them, and frankly it makes no difference to me). They might have thought that he was gay, but they thought it had no bearing on their ministry so they didn't ask. Only when they realized the funeral would have open celebration of the man's life with his partner, did they change plans. I do agree that they caved once they realized he was gay, but they had already made a promise, so instead of hosting it, they paid the rent for the funeral home where the funeral was held instead.

I find it hard to fault the church, after they paid for everything, and simply felt that a celebration of homosexuality, even as a part of someone's life, was not something they wanted to have in their church. It's really sad, but at the same time, they have to stand for what they profess to believe. To me, paying for the other location, paying for all the food, and ministering to the man while he was sick was indicative of a truly caring church, even if they follow a strict biblical worldview concerning homosexuality.

Fire at will.

[tdogg]

I think they did some discussing and the pastor had a change of heart. Whether or not it was a change of his heart or those above him in the religious hierarchy in which he exists, it was a change of heart nonetheless.

Point here - no matter why the decision was made, it was made and it truly hurt people, and is just another fine example of the homophobia that runs rampant in this country. Specially homophobia fueled by religious conservatives.

[stev0]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/081007dnmetgayfuneral.3617689.html

This situation cries out for some kind of response.

Okay I think it's pretty terrible thing to just opt out on them on the last second...

but I've also got to have understanding for the church... the church has to have a strong footing. It would be different if the church did not have prior rules and such against things of this sort and denied him a funeral, but the people holding the funeral had to have some speculation that they would be uncooperative with the idea of highlighting something they are obviously against in their "sanctuary."

I'm for giving a proper and fitting memorial for someone's life. Gay, lesbian, Christian, non-Christian, Buddhist.
Just, if they were going to have that kinda of memorial they should have found a fitting church or building.

[keltic63]

Okay I think it's pretty terrible thing to just opt out on them on the last second...

but I've also got to have understanding for the church... the church has to have a strong footing. It would be different if the church did not have prior rules and such against things of this sort and denied him a funeral, but the people holding the funeral had to have some speculation that they would be uncooperative with the idea of highlighting something they are obviously against in their "sanctuary."

I'm for giving a proper and fitting memorial for someone's life. Gay, lesbian, Christian, non-Christian, Buddhist.
Just, if they were going to have that kinda of memorial they should have found a fitting church or building.

Sorry stev0, you didn't read this thread or the links very well. The church cared for the man while he was sick, knew the family, and offered the church for the funeral. THEN they backed out. the church lied on several occasions as to their reasons for withdrawing their offer. And YOU want to blame the victim!

[antiochian]

I went to High Point "Church"s website and gave them a little piece of my mind. Seriously, I'd consider it a blessing if every church like this in America would go bankrupt and have to close. Of course, there are only far too many fundamentalists who gladly fill their offering plates.

Ya know, the Bible has a few little pesky verses about judging others, apparently those passages aren't in the NIBV (New International Bigot's Version).

[progressive4christ]

I read that article and yeah, I was shocked at how a pastor (Gary Simons, brother-in-law of Joel Osteen) of a huge church could say something like that, not to a few fellow members and overheard by someone, mind you, but spoken directly to the media. Wow. A letter to him will not be effective as he's clearly clueless. (Note to Christians of goodwill -- you must stop giving these people your attendance, money, and loyalty. More on that below.)



This is a great statement. I'm filing it away for when someone offers us water or a donut while supporting anti-gay policies and tries to play that off like Pastor Simons. What was it he said. Oh yeah, this:



Acts of love towards the family, including this little comment about the deceased's mother:



Someone obviously slept during Jesus 101.

Nice work. Sometimes a phone call and a handful of personal letters can be more effective than a single letter with lots of signatures.

Now to add something. It would be remiss, I think, to not point to the anti-gay teachings, and then point to the anti-gay actions, and ask how people with LGBT loved ones were caught off guard. So many people who love and affirm their gay family members continue to feed both these mega-churches with their money and the egos of these pastors with their attendance.

My brother and sister-in-law delighted me by attending our wedding, but then, at the lunch following the ceremony, shared they were now happily involved with Lexington's largest church, which surprise, surprise, is very anti-gay. It caused a bit of a heated argument, because, well, when it comes to family, nonviolent, diplomatic, "let's investigate why" Jamie is slow to the draw, while WTF?! Jamie is quite swift.

Anyhow, this denial of a funeral is a sad case and kudos to the family for not accepting the church's offer of food and funeral hosting in exchange for silence. I'm just thinking about how good folks can stop giving these people opportunities to do this.

Perfectly said. People of tolerance need not to feed these people and kind of amunition. I think the best we can do is tend to the wounded in matters like this so they do not feel alone. Also keep it at a political level in the since of changing laws to protect rights. My heart is so heavey lainden with such sorrow and disgust. I signed Cecil's obit too.

[progressive4christ]

I checked out the churches website and of course they have a section on this. My only question is; Why the hell would any family want to have their openly gay son's funeral at a right wing neo con church anyways? That is like pokeing the bear. Even if they were nice to them in the begining. People by now should know not to even bother with thses kind of Christians. Why did not the MCC of Houston area step out and ofer their services or did they? The chapel of Hope is in Houston.

I cant even see even attending a church like this for regular church services. Let them have theirs and we can have ours; full of friuts of the spirit and acceptance. I am so tired of being embarrased and irritatied with thse kind of christians. if they want to change they can come to us instead of us going to them for any reason.

[Steven E. Webster]

I checked out the churches website and of course they have a section on this. My only question is; Why the hell would any family want to have their openly gay son's funeral at a right wing neo con church anyways? That is like pokeing the bear. Even if they were nice to them in the begining. People by now should know not to even bother with thses kind of Christians. Why did not the MCC of Houston area step out and ofer their services or did they? The chapel of Hope is in Houston.

I cant even see even attending a church like this for regular church services. Let them have theirs and we can have ours; full of friuts of the spirit and acceptance. I am so tired of being embarrased and irritatied with thse kind of christians. if they want to change they can come to us instead of us going to them for any reason.

I don't think you fully understand the context in which the bereaved family found themselves in relationship to this congregation (it's a long story). Maybe it would be nice if we didn't have to live in the same world as Fundamentalists, but we don't have that option. There will continue to be instances where individual LGBT people and their families find themselves in relationship to Fundamentalist congregations--not necessarily by deliberate and fully informed choice, but by circumstance.

Those of us who remain in denominations that are not fully LGBT affirming (I'm a Methodist) often say that if we left, there still would be LGBT kids born within the denomination who would grow up to suffer oppression. So it's our duty (some of us think) to remain and seek to reform the denomination.

We could try to ignore the Fundamentalists, but it is hard to avoid them entirely.

Steven Webster

[keltic63]

I checked out the churches website and of course they have a section on this. My only question is; Why the hell would any family want to have their openly gay son's funeral at a right wing neo con church anyways? That is like pokeing the bear. Even if they were nice to them in the begining. People by now should know not to even bother with thses kind of Christians. Why did not the MCC of Houston area step out and ofer their services or did they? The chapel of Hope is in Houston.

I cant even see even attending a church like this for regular church services. Let them have theirs and we can have ours; full of friuts of the spirit and acceptance. I am so tired of being embarrased and irritatied with thse kind of christians. if they want to change they can come to us instead of us going to them for any reason.

you do realize that this section was added after the situation occurred, right? there was a lot of backpedalling, and storychanging, and some might even say that various individuals from the church distorted the truth.

[progressive4christ]

you do realize that this section was added after the situation occurred, right? there was a lot of backpedalling, and storychanging, and some might even say that various individuals from the church distorted the truth.

yes, and even if it were not, I would expect them to lie anyways. I just don't see dealing with right wing churches period is my point. I am not sticking up for the church. I just do not see why gays and their families want to be apart of this kind of church for any reason.

[keltic63]

yes, and even if it were not, I would expect them to lie anyways. I just don't see dealing with right wing churches period is my point. I am not sticking up for the church. I just do not see why gays and their families want to be apart of this kind of church for any reason.

it appears that most of this family did not have a church home, although the brother held a job at this particular church, and as part of their ministry to him, became involved with this family that included a gay couple. The church wanted to minister and show their love, but unfortunately, their love doesn't include everyone. I'm willing to bet that they will do funerals for unrepentant divorcees, though.

[progressive4christ]

I myself attent an UMC church that has several recociliation classes and I am apart of the recon board, but I grew up right wing neocon evangelical and I can say nothing will change these peopl on a whole. I have no hope.

[keltic63]

I myself attent an UMC church that has several recociliation classes and I am apart of the recon board, but I grew up right wing neocon evangelical and I can say nothing will change these peopl on a whole. I have no hope.

I do have hope. Young evangelicals are looking at the gay issue and saying that there are more important issues to address. I also know that within my denomination, there are conservative churches that would hate I'm in the position I hold within my local congregation, and others that make our liberal congregation look like a restricted country club. I think the UMC is the same way. But I do have hope, and that's why it's important to confront these people with their homophobia and force them to examine it. Slowly, things change. Someday, orientation will be understood and no longer an issue. Oh how we long for that time!

[progressive4christ]

I just hate seeing GLBT people hurt in the name of God. I am a bit emotional about this subject matter. so, sometimes I feel all lose of hope; for hate is a sin and sin will always exist. I know that not the whole world will change , but so many lose out on that relationship with God because of this hate which I find to be a horrible part of some churches and there are masses of them.

I agree with you saying about a liberal country club. I do not want that either.