Fallout after the Equality Ride [Archive] - Soulforce Community Forums

NathanATX

03-28-2006, 04:55 PM

|| News || http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid28310.asp

March 28, 2006

Oklahoma school board scraps gay protections in wake of Equality Ride

Days after the Equality Ride bus toured the state of Oklahoma, with stops at Oral Roberts University in Tulsa and Oklahoma Baptist University in Shawnee, the Oklahoma board of education struck the sexual orientation portion from its antidiscrimination policy. The change happened without notice last Thursday in Oklahoma City in response to a state representative's complaints about the Equality Ride, in which more than 30 young LGBT activists are attempting to meet with students at Christian universities across the country that prohibit the enrollment of gays.

Previously the school board's antidiscrimination policy covered sexual orientation as well as a student's family, social, and cultural background. Now those categories have been struck from the policy, which has reverted back to state and federal antidiscrimination laws protecting a student's race, for instance.

The action came at the request of Oklahoma representative Kevin Calvey, a Republican seeking election to the U.S. Congress. He said in a statement that "the board's new rule will protect public schools from having to allow homosexual rights organizations to hold meetings on school grounds."

Citing the recent Equality Ride protests at the two universities, where several Equality Riders were arrested, Calvey added, "This isn't really at the high school level yet, but I would expect it someday to be."

The head of an Oklahoma gay rights group said that the policy change is a part of wider political positioning by conservatives this election year. "It's just open season on GLBT people at the state legislature," Laura Belmonte, president of Tulsa Oklahomans for Human Rights, told Tulsaworld.com. "It is our belief that these conservative legislators are using these issues as a wedge issue to try to mobilize their base in an effort to take over the senate this year."

There was no comment from the school board's superintendent. (The Advocate)

NathanATX

03-28-2006, 06:56 PM

http://www.okhouse.gov/OkhouseMedia/news_story.aspx?NewsID=630

Calvey Praises Reversal of Sexual Orientation Policy
3/23/2006 3:06:00 PM

Contact: State Rep. Kevin Calvey
Capitol: (405) 557-7370
Del City: (405) 808-0041

OKLAHOMA CITY –(March 23, 2006)State Rep. Kevin Calvey praised the Oklahoma State Board of Education today for repealing their sexual orientation policy.

After a request from Calvey, the State Board of Education met today to make a rule change that repeals their current sexual orientation policy by modifying it to be in sync with federal and state law.

"This brings Oklahoma’s educational rules in line with federal and state law and also in line with the values shared by the large majority of Oklahomans," said Calvey, R-Del City.

Currently, federal and state laws require strong anti-discrimination policies in the areas of gender and race but do not address sexual orientation.

Calvey said the board’s new rule will protect public schools from having to allow homosexual-rights organizations to hold meetings on school grounds and will also give school boards more control over personnel decisions.

"The board’s old policy would have opened the door for our schools to become battlegrounds where activists for ‘alternative’ lifestyles would try to undermine the moral teachings of parents," said Calvey. "Now, Oklahomans won’t have to worry about that."

"I would like to thank Deborah and David Williams for bringing this issue to my attention and Mike Jestes and David Dunn of the Oklahoma Family Policy Council for raising public awareness on this issue."

NathanATX

03-28-2006, 07:04 PM

http://www.fotizo.net/images/calvey_k.jpg

http://www.lsb.state.ok.us/house/Members/Calvey.jpg

State Representative Kevin Calvey

Capitol Address:
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd
Room 437
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
(405) 557-7370

District Address:
3909 SE 29th, Ste. 160
Del City, OK 73115
(405) 677-1179

Email:
kevincalvey@okhouse.gov (kevincalvey@okhouse.gov)

NathanATX

03-28-2006, 07:11 PM

I called him.

Sharieab

03-28-2006, 08:04 PM

I had a response, but it just didn't seem to do justice to that. I know a few student athletes at OU that are out. If OU decided to follow the "policies" they would lose a couple of athletes that make that school's teams really good. And that is just coming from the athletic point of view. Its just crazy and makes me so frustrated.

Venari

03-28-2006, 09:00 PM

At the risk of getting people more upset. Isn’t this what I said would happen? The message of Soulforce is a important one, but how the Equality Ride is representing it only gives fuel to the opposition. This way they can sway the opinions of the people in the middle who may have been supportive.

As I said before, another way need to be found as this isn’t going to work... and has it worked. How many schools have honestly mage change and given more then just lip service to prevent a protest at their front doors.

I fear where the similar back lash that has began to happed at my school is going to end. From what people are now saying, and begging to support, its looking like the policies we had back in the 80's that make Falwell look like a moderate.

But I guess we'll need to wait and see how its going to play out and if in the end the Equality Riders are going to feel good about how they gave their message to these schools but only caused more "suffering” for the GLBT students currently attending.

Just my two pence,
Venari

revtj

03-28-2006, 09:34 PM

Venari

03-28-2006, 10:07 PM

Venari,

Your response reminded me of a bumper sticker I have seen that says, "Well Behaved Women Rarely Make History"

Do you think Jesus should've kept quiet, been a nice guy, and stayed out of the Temple on that fateful day when he turned over the moneychangers tables? Maybe he should've written a Martha Stewart-type note to them or something instead?

My 2 pence
revtj :'(

There is a very clear difference between what Jesus did and what the Equality Ride is doing. For one Jesus did not invite the media to "expose" the wrongs of the money changers. Paired with that it is clear that going to the temple Jesus did not plan ahead of time what he was going to do.

Jesus was faced with a situation and reacted accordingly. As should all Christians when faced with injustice we act immediately we do not plot and plan to have the media there to expose how wrong the offender is we take immediate action to correct the offender.

So yes I agree well behaved people rarely make history, because we are the ones in the market place going about our own business without an agenda and when we see an injustice we immediately take action to correct it, often to the dismay of others who want to maintain the peace.

-Venari

Vanessa White

03-29-2006, 09:25 AM

The whole idea of LGBT orientation and rights/marriage/visibility etc. would be in the media whether it had been actively invited or not. And, to describe what is happening as part of an agenda I don't really think is fair. I mean, this is our LIVES we are talking about, and the lives of the students that are in these schools, with their souls screaming in pain some of them, because they feel so isolated and alone. yes, they actively chose to attend these colleges knowing what the policies are, yet, maybe they hoped the reality would be different. Maybe they wanted to attend a Christian institution because their Christianity is as important to them as their sexual orientation. THese riders have been willing to be arrested, put out on the fringe of campuses in some places, or not allowed on at all, in order to speak about something that does affect students on each of those campuses. If it is such a certain truth that homosexuality is a sin, then these Universities should not be afraid to let us speak to their students, or to them, for that matter.

We as gay persons end up being depicted as nothing more than people with an agenda, a political or publicity ploy. We are human beings, who want to love as close to Christ as we can. We want to reach out to others that are probably in pain, and raise AWARENESS by providing INFORMATION. One of the main reasons for discrimination and hostility, and sometimes hatred, toward LGBT persons is ignorance to the accurate information.

NathanATX

03-29-2006, 09:40 AM

revtj

03-29-2006, 10:03 AM

I think the whole point of the Equality Ride is that these injustices have been going on for years... and "well behaved people" haven't done anything about them.

Thanks, Nathan, this was my point exactly! :)

Eventually people get tired of being subservient, of listening to rhetoric in the statehouses, in the nation's capitol, and in houses of worship and religious schools which says essentially : you are less than we are. You don't deserve human rights. Your dignity is at our disposal. Your right to be is at our whim.

They get sick and tired of it and they stand up (or bike up) and do something about it. The equality ride is a nonviolent protest. How much better could we respond to the violence constantly done against LGBT people? I think it is an admirable event that we (str8 & gay America) will look back on as necessary and beautiful.

How is it not like Jesus? He was a Jew in a land conquered by Rome. He was not allowed to be a citizen. The religious authorities had sold out to Rome in order to preserve the temple at Jerusalem, and in the process, had become corrupt and sanctimonious. It looks so much like what homophobia is doing to the church & christian education in 2006 it's amazing!

schoolboi

03-29-2006, 10:54 AM

There is a very clear difference between what Jesus did and what the Equality Ride is doing. For one Jesus did not invite the media to "expose" the wrongs of the money changers. Paired with that it is clear that going to the temple Jesus did not plan ahead of time what he was going to do.

Jesus was faced with a situation and reacted accordingly. As should all Christians when faced with injustice we act immediately we do not plot and plan to have the media there to expose how wrong the offender is we take immediate action to correct the offender.

Interesting note, if Jesus did not want people to know about what he was doing, then why did the whole town know as soon as it happened? Also why are we still talking about it some 2000 years later?!

Do you really think Jesus did not plan ahead for what he was going to do in the temple that day? He had been to the temple many times through out his life. He had seen the same scene over and over again. I am sure he had thought about different responses to the situation many times. I’m sure that he felt that the time was right to do what he had already considered in order to make the biggest statement. Jesus had taught in the temple on numerous occasions. Although we have not biblical record of him discussing the situation of the moneychangers I would bet that it had come up before in dialogue and confrontation with the religious leaders.

Another thing I’m sure he knew was that this one act would not change the situation. He also knew that the religious leaders in the temple would not like it, that he might be arrested, and or at least removed from the grounds. He felt the message he had was important enough to risk that.

Was Jesus trying to change the minds of the religious leaders in the temple when he took this action? I don’t really think so. Maybe he hoped that in the long run they ideas would change. He was taking a symbolic action to elevate the awareness of the people to this incorrect use of God’s house and of the injustice being waged on the poor who had to deal with these sales people. He was trying to get under the skin of the religious leaders and put pressure on them to change.

This instance is a perfect example of nonviolent resistance as thought by Gandhi and King. They both claim to have got their ideas from the actions and teachings of Jesus. I think it is a good example of what we are doing with the Equality Ride. We are taking action that to many or even most people may seem rash. We are willing take the risk of reticule and even negative response (like being blamed for the Oklahoma law) from our adversary. We know that these religious institutions will not change just because of this one action, but we do know that: 1) We will be changed and renewed. 2) Our closeted brothers and sisters will know they are not alone. 3) The general public will be made aware of the injustice. 4) The Church will be aware of the injustice. 5) The institutions will be aware of the injustice.

That being said I would like to make a short comment regarding the political climate in Oklahoma. I am a native Oklahoman. When I lived there I was a committee member the Democratic Party on the state level and spent many hours as a volunteer. Politics in Oklahoma are EXTREMELY red. (I mean come on they elected Tom Coburn for a Senator!) Even most Democrats in the state would put Falwell to shame. Oklahoma already has some of the harshest anti-gay laws in the country. I would have been very amazed if the discrimination policy would have passed. A am also curtain that if it would have passed it would only have been a matter of time before it was changed again to the current policy.

NathanATX

03-29-2006, 11:13 AM

I'm an Okie too.

Ditto, Schoolboi.

vaguy78

03-29-2006, 11:37 AM

Venari

03-29-2006, 01:55 PM

Interesting note, if Jesus did not want people to know about what he was doing, then why did the whole town know as soon as it happened? Also why are we still talking about it some 2000 years later?!

Do you really think Jesus did not plan ahead for what he was going to do in the temple that day? He had been to the temple many times through out his life. He had seen the same scene over and over again. I am sure he had thought about different responses to the situation many times. I’m sure that he felt that the time was right to do what he had already considered in order to make the biggest statement. Jesus had taught in the temple on numerous occasions. Although we have not biblical record of him discussing the situation of the moneychangers I would bet that it had come up before in dialogue and confrontation with the religious leaders.

Another thing I’m sure he knew was that this one act would not change the situation. He also knew that the religious leaders in the temple would not like it, that he might be arrested, and or at least removed from the grounds. He felt the message he had was important enough to risk that.

Schoolboi,

You say you’re a youth pastor so I am assuming you are familiar with the terms "isogesis" and "exegesis." One is where we impose our thoughts and ideas onto the biblical texts and the other is where we look for what the text has to say in its context... these are the key components of Hermeneutics.

I hate to say it but you are placing your ideas into the passages. First, there is nothing to give and credence to anyone besides the disciples being with Jesus. Also the temple was the center of the community, in my city Thursday is the farmers market day which is held right in the plaza down town. Now if I were to go there and approach one of the commercial vendors trying to sell produce they couldn’t move on their shelves and over turned their tables about 100,000+ people would know about the commotion pretty quickly. So you point is rather moot that based on the nature of the society with the Temple being the center any disturbance there would be quickly known through the city,

Yes we know the Jesus had been to the Temple several time during his life. And the money changers were there probably there... as history shows they have always been there. But you missed one KEY statement Jesus makes. He quotes Jeremiah 7, namely verse 11. This section deals with extortion of the poor in worship practices. So what Jesus is confronted with is not the same thing He has seen His entire life but they were corrupting Gods house with their unethical practices and "cheapening" the worship of God in His own house.

So no the actions of the Equality Ride have no basis for compairson to what Jesus did in the Temple. Jesus did not go there planning on taking this action He took this action when He saw what was going on.

This instance is a perfect example of nonviolent resistance as thought by Gandhi and King. They both claim to have got their ideas from the actions and teachings of Jesus. I think it is a good example of what we are doing with the Equality Ride. We are taking action that to many or even most people may seem rash. We are willing take the risk of reticule and even negative response (like being blamed for the Oklahoma law) from our adversary. We know that these religious institutions will not change just because of this one action, but we do know that: 1) We will be changed and renewed. 2) Our closeted brothers and sisters will know they are not alone. 3) The general public will be made aware of the injustice. 4) The Church will be aware of the injustice. 5) The institutions will be aware of the injustice.

Your statement here only furthers the point. The actions the Equality Ride are taking only mimic the actions of Jesus but lack the depth of His actions. I say agenda as you to not take immediate action but wait and "plot" how to best create a shocking situation to use to your advantage.

So, until I see Jacob or Herrin, or any of the other riders, get arrested during their everyday lives while going to the market or eating with friends to correct an injustice they see right then their actions now are only going to be hollow imitations of a deep and meaningful stance Jesus took.

-Venari

Venari

03-29-2006, 02:04 PM

The whole idea of LGBT orientation and rights/marriage/visibility etc. would be in the media whether it had been actively invited or not. And, to describe what is happening as part of an agenda I don't really think is fair. I mean, this is our LIVES we are talking about, and the lives of the students that are in these schools, with their souls screaming in pain some of them, because they feel so isolated and alone.

Vanessa,

I apologize if I offended you. I did not intend to portray GLBT rights as an 'agenda.' I would never say that an organization like the HRC has an agenda. What I was saying may be more offensive to this audience that the Equality Ride seems to have an agenda as from my stance as a gay person who has the perspective of one of the schools being visited the Equality Ride represents only what they wish to show as a truth, not the things which are true but may counter something they wish to say.

Vanessa, I want to ask about how you say people are suffering. Have you talked to any current students at these schools, or you going off what you have heard from the Equality Ride? If then later is the case I know many GLB students who are strongly opposed to Equality Ride because they do not represent our voices they only speak with their voice and say it is ours.

-Venari

Vanessa White

03-29-2006, 02:24 PM

Your point is well taken, regarding the students that I refer to as being in emotional pain at these institutions. No, I have not spoken to any of these students. I have read some of the letters that they have written as LGBT students at these institutions, unsigned and expressing depression, self-doubt, confusion, alienation, etc. I in no way try to speak for all of the LGBT students at all of these and other Christian institutions. However, I know, first hand and by statements made by gay youths around this country, that the process is quite a painful one, and is intensified by the fact that many of the resources that these youths rely on for support about other issues are resources that, at times, have a very negative view about being gay. Isolation is a very real situation for many gay persons, although it is not my experience now, it was in the past as a youth, at a Catholic college in my late teens, and even beyond college. I believe that you do know students who report that they do not have feelings such as these, may feel quite comfortable in how the school they are at handles the issue of homosexuality. You may not know about the others for good reason, they are isolating themselves out of the fear of rejection.

Also, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree as far as the ways and means in which Equality RIders are bringing their message to the schools, as to whether there is an agenda in it or not. I really create a negative picture in my mind with the word "agenda", because the times it has been directed at me in terms of the general gay community, it has been in a very negative connotation. If your intent is to mean for the use of the word to have that type of negative connotation, I am either looking at the Equality Ride in a very rose-colored way, or it really is a matter of a group of individuals believing in something fiercely enough, to move against obstacles as peacefully as possible, as publicly as possible because we have had to be quiet and ashamed for too long, and to maybe save some lives of youths that are in pain, and need to know that they are okay in the eyes of God. It doesn't mean you will take that on as your belief, but I support them as a representation of part of the LGBT community at large and its allies, and I do not feel uncomfortable in stating that.
I consider myself to be a religious person, I love God and Jesus, and I try to do the best for others that I can in any given day. I don't know the Bible well, and sometimes feel quite self-conscious about that here. But, what I do know and believe, in my whole heart and soul, is that God loves me for who I am, that I have been created to be a gay person in my lifetime, that I can embrace that fully and be the human being that I am meant to be. I think that is why I support Soulforce so much. Even though groups of us will always disagree on what the Bible actually says and means, I can still live a Christian life and be a good Christian, and not because I am trying to define Jesus in a way to meets my self-centered needs, but because that is who he is- loving, embracing, and accepting of me.

revtj

03-29-2006, 03:01 PM

I just want to say that when I was a student at a Christian College (Covenant), I didn't exactly know I was being treated with extreme bias.

What I thought was that the Bible gave me only one choice: be heterosexual or burn in hell.

What I thought was that I could either be a christian, or be gay, but there was no possible way to be both. For 12 years after graduation I did not consider myself christian.

What I thought was that God had goofed up somehow with me, arbitrarily afflicting me with a curse that made me irredeemable.

When I sought counsel regarding these beliefs I had been taught, they were re-inforced with Bible verses and the historic faith.

So, it may be that gay students at christian colleges & universities are in a private hell, tortured by these either/or choices...but they may not consider themselves discriminated against or suffering.

When I look back on those days at Covenant, there are many happy memories. But I was being discriminated against, I was hated and friends and fellow students were being taught to be disgusted over me and people like me, and I was suffering more than I knew. It took years to work through it. It took 15 years before I would partake of communion again.

That is why I support the Equality Rides. I think the cognitive dissonance they are causing is FANTASTIC. I'm glad some of the postings by students are irritated. Good! It's about time.

Vanessa White

03-29-2006, 03:24 PM

Thanks for your perspective and personal story. I appreciate it and am glad for you and for us here that you were able to emerge on the other side of love and light. What a journey. I also lived with out church and God, I believe, for many years, because I of the "heterosexuality or hell" view as well, and then ended up changing religions so at least I felt embraced, not pitied or tolerated. I embrace God more fully than ever and have a strength his relationship with me that I could not have previously imagined.

revtj

03-29-2006, 03:48 PM

I embrace God more fully than ever and have a strength his relationship with me that I could not have previously imagined.

Amen, Vanessa! My spiritual life is/has been incredibly enhanced by being gay. Now I see it as a blessing, as something that sprurred deeper growth and a refusal to accept shallow, cookie-cutter answers.

What if we are the blessed ones in the church who have a gift to give that they don't want because we're the untouchables of our era? I often think this is true...don't you?

On another thread several people pointed out how gay & transgender people had priestly & other sacred tribal functions in indigenous cultures. I think that is WHO WE ARE now and it is thrilling to claim it! :weee:

Zerbie

03-29-2006, 10:11 PM

TJ and Vanessa, following your tangent for a few moments: Yes. Because being gay involves the very nature of who you are, being gay in our culture provides an impetus to go inward and really delve into some important questions of life/identity/physical vs spiritual reality - IF one dares to delve into those questions. That's a big if. And delving usually takes years, even decades. Having spent a lot of time in those depths, I'll say it's *worth it!*

Thanks for sharing some of your private story TJ, and it saddens me to imagine you in that past feeling so "irredeemable." :'( So many forumites have posted painful things in various discussions about their past feelings that I'm left wanting to hug my computer monitor in frustrated, belated empathy. Here. :love: :love:

Ya know, most of my memories of my own youth are of feeling okay with homosexuality/bisexuality - but when I really re-examine my past (read my old diaries) I recall that was once a theoretic, more than a daily reality. I had some negative sense of myself, some internalized homophobia that made me feel rather. . .guilty. . .about being attracted to women. I tend to forget that nowadays.

Since so many of us look back at our own pasts and see that we were suffering, either really feeling it at the time (I spent a whole year feeling like a freak and longing to join the lesbian groups on campus but believing I wasn't really "like those people"!), or perhaps only suffering in the sense of not growing, not expanding into the fullness of who we are meant to be - it stands to reason that the same sorts of things are going on with some of today's LGBT youth as well. It's fair to talk about it as a likelihood - because it's only logical.

Now, to get back to Venari because you make some interesting points that most of us here usually shy away from: You may be right that the Ride uses a strategy that alienates some people including some gays. It's possible - I'm one of the staunchest supporters of gay rights you will ever find, but I have been known to disagree, sometimes frequently, with the actions of some of our organizations at various times. In order to evaluate the Ride I would have to be at a school they are visiting, or else on the Ride with them. From a distance, I can only surmise. I tend to feel supportive of the Ride because of it's stated mission, one which I share and feel strongly about. But in actuality I do NOT know what it looks/sounds/feels like when they tour. I am guessing I would probably continue to be in support if I could see it. That's now. Several years ago when I was in undergrad, I might not have felt as supportive. But I do recall that when I was not "out to myself" I was very uncomfortable with gay activism, no matter how mildly expressed, at the same time that I was fascinated by it. It's possible that Soulforce could stand to benefit from Venari's observations. If the goal is to persuade, then observations from Venari and others become increasingly important.

However, if the goal is to send a message to the silent, closeted, conflicted or questioning gays (Ls Bs and Ts) that they are cared about, then the strategy starts to become less important than the visibility and the presence.

schoolboi

03-30-2006, 06:58 AM

You say you’re a youth pastor so I am assuming you are familiar with the terms "isogesis" and "exegesis." One is where we impose our thoughts and ideas onto the biblical texts and the other is where we look for what the text has to say in its context... these are the key components of Hermeneutics.

In my defense I feel that my statement below speaks for itself. As for my hermeneutic I feel that it is clear and respectable.

In regard to the statements about closeted students affected by the ride, I personally know 35 closeted students and staff at Liberty University. EVERY one of them was grateful for the witness of the Equality Ride on their campus. (Even some going through “ex-gay” therapy) I am sure that there are some who did not like the ride’s presence, but you can’t please everyone. And reaching out to closeted students is only one of the groups we are trying to reach.

Venari

03-30-2006, 10:50 AM

In regard to the statements about closeted students affected by the ride, I personally know 35 closeted students and staff at Liberty University. EVERY one of them was grateful for the witness of the Equality Ride on their campus. (Even some going through “ex-gay” therapy) I am sure that there are some who did not like the ride’s presence, but you can’t please everyone. And reaching out to closeted students is only one of the groups we are trying to reach.

Schoolboi,

You validate my point and my criticism of the Equality Ride. You know students at Liberty do you know students at any of the other schools? Or are you basing your assumptions of those schools from your knowledge of Liberty and what the Equality Ride tells you about them? The point is not all the schools are the same; many come from very different theological backgrounds and very different social views. So to classify all the schools in one way is as I state before a prejudiced view point.

I have stated before there are many differences between the schools... take Liberty and NCU. It seems Jerry Falwell really cannot go more then 12 hours without making some foot in the mouth anit-gay comment... while Gordon Anderson, accused of constantly preaching against gays, has in the last 5 years made a "derogatory" comment about the perceived "homosexual lifestyle” and when students challenged him on it he apologized.

So yes you can’t please everyone. But the Equality Ride can not offend people by being truthful about each of the schools they are visiting and not paint them all with the same "homophobic" or "anti-gay" paint brush they are so fond of.

-Venari

schoolboi

03-30-2006, 05:31 PM

You validate my point and my criticism of the Equality Ride.

OK. Let me un-validate it. You ask if I know students from any of the other schools. I’m glad you ask. As a matter of fact I know students and resent alumni from Oral Roberts, Oklahoma Baptist, Abilene Christian, Brigham Young, and yes even North Central. I also know students at schools not receiving a visit from the ride this year but have similar polices like Evangel, Central Bible, Southwest AG, Southeastern AG, Bob Jones, Southern Nazarene, and I could go on and on.

I have spoken to them. I have been a shoulder to cry on while many of them where forced into “ex-gay ministry” or simply kicked out. I have a broad knowledge of the official policies and behind the scenes actions of these schools. Yes I happen to live near Liberty and the reality of their anti-gay agenda is in my face 24-7, but it is not my only experience. I agree with you that not all of these schools are the same. The have very different histories and theologies. One thing they do share in common is their lack of acceptance and understanding of gay students. I can classify all of the schools on the ride and the others I have listed below as anti-gay because each of them has a written policy discriminating against God’s gay kids. Regardless of what Falwell, Anderson, or any other University leader says, the written policies speak for themselves. Even if Anderson said tomorrow, “It’s ok to be gay here. Same gender couples can hold hands, date, and even have wedding ceremonies on campus.” If the policy did not change I would still say the school is promoting an anti-gay policy.

It’s time to wake up and realize these schools ARE anti-gay. It does not matter what I say, you say, current students of the schools, or the Equality Ride says the schools are speaking for themselves in their written policies of discrimination.

One of the main arguments I am very tired of hearing is that these schools also have other policies regarding heterosexual conduct. That may be true, but married students are free to have sex. If same gender couples who regardless of the state or federal laws are also married in the eyes of God then their having sex should be fine too. There truly is a double standard.

themattperry

03-30-2006, 05:56 PM

Schoolboi --

I agree with you when you say the policies speak for themselves. So often there is so much defensive dirt kicked up by people here about their school and how it is different, doesn't discriminate etc etc .... However, as I've said elsewhere, there is one, single sine qua non which all these schools have in common, and that indeed is a written discriminatory policy.

Instead of splitting hairs, let's talk about these discriminatory policies, and how we can work to change them.

Regarding marriage, my personal opinion is that marriage is kind of a sperate debate, and that if we are looking for schools to recognize marriage equality we might not get far -- -yet .... I am more hopeful, however, that some schools would be receptive to simple arguments about discriminatory language in their policies ... if all they mean to do is ban pre-nuptual sex -- as so many claim on these forums -- then let's just do that, and not single out gay people.

dr__dawggy

03-30-2006, 06:28 PM

Schoolboi --

I am more hopeful, however, that some schools would be receptive to simple arguments about discriminatory language in their policies ... if all they mean to do is ban pre-nuptual sex -- as so many claim on these forums -- then let's just do that, and not single out gay people.

Have the Equity Riders made this type of request at their various stops? it does not seem unreasonable to me to simply state that the ban applies to all sex acts outside of marriage, without mentioning specific types of relationships.

themattperry

03-30-2006, 06:35 PM

[/B]

Have the Equity Riders made this type of request at their various stops? it does not seem unreasonable to me to simply state that the ban applies to all sex acts outside of marriage, without mentioning specific types of relationships.

From what I can tell Eq.Ride's position is just that discrimination against glbt students on campus must end. The reason that schools get visited by ER is that they specifically mention homosexuality in their policies ... but I guess this discrimination could be seen more widely than that.

I'm not sure if ER sees it as their role to request certain specific changes in school policy, or if they've actually made such requests. If I were at such a school, I would push for a move like this as a good first step.

So yah, I agree with you dawggy .. let's get the discriminatory language out of the policies! That would be awesome :-) Then we can move on to more interesting things, like working for a just and inclusive definition of marriage.

awediot

03-30-2006, 07:06 PM

You guys are right on the money... Most administrators see the issue as an irritant, not a crisis, and a couple word strikes, that they don't really care that much about anyway, is a great compromise... We share the understanding and beliefs of fidelity, faithfulness, commitment and Love, and we see the pain of promiscuity and adultery as well as they do. We back the reasoning and sanity behind rules of conduct. Just a few words... I imagine all that middle ground going to Hell will take care of itself.

schoolboi

03-30-2006, 08:43 PM

Regarding marriage, my personal opinion is that marriage is kind of a sperate debate, and that if we are looking for schools to recognize marriage equality we might not get far -- -yet .... I am more hopeful, however, that some schools would be receptive to simple arguments about discriminatory language in their policies ... if all they mean to do is ban pre-nuptual sex -- as so many claim on these forums -- then let's just do that, and not single out gay people.

I agree that the issue of marriage is a bit ahead of what we are working on with the ride right now. I was just using this as an extreme example to magnify the hypocrisy of simply saying that gay sex is not the only sex forbidden.

Venari

03-31-2006, 08:51 AM

I agree that the issue of marriage is a bit ahead of what we are working on with the ride right now. I was just using this as an extreme example to magnify the hypocrisy of simply saying that gay sex is not the only sex forbidden.

But that is just it; you are showing hypocrisy over the issue. Many of the schools take what stance they can to view all students in an equal light. Equality is the goal of the Equality Ride.

So many of the schools place all students on the same level by the rules they have in place; namely being no-sex outside of marriage which gives them the time to evaluate a new situation. What the Equality Ride is doing it telling them that isn’t good enough and they need to make a decision now, which in most of these cases is causing them to fall back on their "traditional" stance.

Many people are getting sick of some arguments, so please don’t tell me these schools prevent students from meeting and falling in love. I can think of 3 couples that met at my school and upon graduation moved in together, so people do meet. Granted were not up to speed with the rest of society, were more like the mid 90's. We saw these couples and knew what was going on but as long as it didn’t become a controversy then it continued and allowed room for conversation as we knew it was only becoming more and more common.

Also you side stepped my question on the honesty on the side of the Equality Ride. When hearing accusations against my school and knowing them to false, how am I to honestly believe anything else said about any of the other schools to be true?

-Venari

Daniel

04-01-2006, 11:15 PM

Many people are getting sick of some arguments, so please don’t tell me these schools prevent students from meeting and falling in love. I can think of 3 couples that met at my school and upon graduation moved in together, so people do meet. Granted were not up to speed with the rest of society, were more like the mid 90's. We saw these couples and knew what was going on but as long as it didn’t become a controversy then it continued and allowed room for conversation as we knew it was only becoming more and more common.i

Well this says something, doesn't it? The implication is that straight couples get to be open about their relationships and gay couples do not.

I think this get to the heart of the matter. The argument about marriage and policies can hardly be an issue if a gay couple can't even be in a relationship openly, can it?

themattperry

04-02-2006, 01:03 AM

So many of the schools place all students on the same level by the rules they have in place; namely being no-sex outside of marriage which gives them the time to evaluate a new situation. What the Equality Ride is doing it telling them that isn’t good enough and they need to make a decision now, which in most of these cases is causing them to fall back on their "traditional" stance.

Venari,

I have to conclude that either you disagree with me and some others on this point (which is certainly possible), or you just didn't read some of my earlier posts. The schools on SF's list ALL specifically mention some variant of "homosexual conduct" or "homosexual behavior" in their policies. This is discriminatory language. The ride doesn't go anywhere that does not have this language on the books. You keep saying that all stundets are treated the same at your school and others ... this is by definition impossible at any place with rules that apply and refer only to gay people.

I know and appreciate your position .. that SF is actually forcing a stiffening of the culture and rules at your school and others. However, you have to really admit, don't you, that your school and all the others on the list have discriminatory policies on their books. I know that you claim it was only after a gay student abused a loophole that your school became that way ... I remember all that you have said. But let's get down to the basic facts here: your school and all of the others have discriminatory rules on the books. Am I wrong?

Regarding your claim of SF's dishonesty ... did you give us the details of the dishonesty and the ability to verify it? If I'm not mistaken, no one knows what school you attend, so it would be hard to really verify your claims, which I think is only fair. If you've discussed these claims of dishonesty in detail somewhere -- like in another thread -- please refer me and I'd be glad to read. SF's mission demands honesty and truth-telling, and I would hope that they really stick to this. If you have verifiable evidence that they have not been honest, I would like to see it becuase if your claims are true that would concern me, to say the least.

I hope your weekend rocks!

Matt

keltic63

04-02-2006, 05:15 PM

So many of the schools place all students on the same level by the rules they have in place; namely being no-sex outside of marriage which gives them the time to evaluate a new situation. What the Equality Ride is doing it telling them that isn’t good enough and they need to make a decision now, which in most of these cases is causing them to fall back on their "traditional" stance.

Many people are getting sick of some arguments, so please don’t tell me these schools prevent students from meeting and falling in love. I can think of 3 couples that met at my school and upon graduation moved in together, so people do meet. Granted were not up to speed with the rest of society, were more like the mid 90's. We saw these couples and knew what was going on but as long as it didn’t become a controversy then it continued and allowed room for conversation as we knew it was only becoming more and more common.

-Venari

What would it take for a gay relationship to become a controversy on campus? holding hands? being seen kissing? would it be behavior that straight people are allowed to engage in? I understand your point about the rules applying equally, no sex outside of marriage, etc. But then, why go on to prohibit homosexual acts? Simply removing that statement from policies would be a big step toward eliminating discrimination. I'm not sure that the rules are applied equally in this case, which is why SF is coming to these many schools. The fact that you know of 3 gay couples who met at school, who waited (felt they had to hide their relationship?) until graduation before being seen as a couple, tells me that it wasn't a safe place for them to be gay.

Venari

04-03-2006, 05:59 PM

Regarding your claim of SF's dishonesty ... did you give us the details of the dishonesty and the ability to verify it? If I'm not mistaken, no one knows what school you attend, so it would be hard to really verify your claims, which I think is only fair. If you've discussed these claims of dishonesty in detail somewhere -- like in another thread -- please refer me and I'd be glad to read. SF's mission demands honesty and truth-telling, and I would hope that they really stick to this. If you have verifiable evidence that they have not been honest, I would like to see it becuase if your claims are true that would concern me, to say the least.

Matt,

I did address the issue of dishonesty in my first post/thread. But as with the recent ACU post. We see the leaders of the Equality Ride making false, or at the very least greatly exaggerated, statements about the schools.

I had addressed issues of how Jacob and Herrin have misrepresented important facts ... like saying in several interviews "Most of the schools are allowing them to visit." When in reality it is less then half. Also as I posted in another thread Media Coverage (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=304&page=3) how it has been presented the CCCU supported the Equality Ride when in fact they officially state they do not.

Then in regards to another student who contacted Jacob and Herrin directly and challenged them on things they have said they were informed that Jacob or Herrin will no longer have further discussions with them on this matter. This is strongly seen in the issues with North Central University. Where Jacob sated a student can be expelled for openly identifying as gay which is false and the rules were just changed as a response to what one of the equality riders did last year. Yet the school offered for the in question rider to sign a waver so they can discuss the facts with Soulforce and the rider has refused. So the school cannot fully comment because Jacob and Herrin are preventing them from speaking the truth, or what the school has discovered to be the truth.

So how can I, or any other faculty or student, take anything the Equality Ride says to be true when they refuse to discuss issues that conflict with what they claim to be true then actively prevent us from being able to discuss them.

I guess looking at it I am seeing a truly great and just message being soiled by the actions of leaders more concerned with their agenda and not the truth of their message.

-Venari

Zerbie

04-03-2006, 09:23 PM

That's entirely possible Venari. I don't know any details at all about what has transpired along the ride, what riders have said, etc. You seem to know way more than I do about it. I would wish you are mistaken, but sadly, I have seen activists proverbially shoot themselves in the foot plenty of times, and it's entirely possible that young passionate activists may be making errors in the way they go about their dealings. Very sad if that is indeed the case.

All I can do from waaaaay out on the sidelines is pray that everyone grows positively from the experience.

awediot

04-03-2006, 09:54 PM

...and Zerbie, if you are on the sidelines, i am off getting nachos. I cannot clear up anything in this dilemma, but Venari's last sentence speaks volumes in itself...

I guess looking at it I am seeing a truly great and just message being soiled by the actions of leaders more concerned with their agenda and not the truth of their message.

Then I can only hope all concerned pay more attention to the message than the messenger. Truth is Truth no matter the percieved integrity of the source.

themattperry

04-04-2006, 03:11 AM

I did address the issue of dishonesty in my first post/thread. But as with the recent ACU post. We see the leaders of the Equality Ride making false, or at the very least greatly exaggerated, statements about the schools.

I am the careful type, especially when it comes to issues of dishonesty, and especially when it involves an organization that I financially and otherwise support. So let's unpack the charges you make here, and see if we can come to some conclusion about them.

In addition, I would like to note that you ignored most of my previous post, which directly asked you whether or not your school had discriminatory rules on the books. I'm not going to mention it again in this post, but please just read what I read and tell me if I am wrong. If I could, I'd like to ask you not to once again explain WHY you have rules like you do, or what events or scandals lead to their implementation -- just answer the question! Does your school have discriminatory language in on its books? Your lack of response to this point makes me think that you know full well that your school does indeed have discriminatory rules, and that you would rather talk about percived problems with SF's leadership than talk about the log in your own eye (and the reason why the ride will be at your school). So please, Venari -- ???

Now on with the post ... I do take this matter very seriously, and should I become convinced that Jake or Herrin or anyone is misrepresenting the facts about schools, I will take it up with them directly as a SF supporter. The TRUTH is what I believe SF should be about .. .as far as I'm concerned, nothing less will do.

I had addressed issues of how Jacob and Herrin have misrepresented important facts ... like saying in several interviews "Most of the schools are allowing them to visit." When in reality it is less then half. Also as I posted in another thread Media Coverage (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=304&page=3) how it has been presented the CCCU supported the Equality Ride when in fact they officially state they do not.

Based on what I can find out from SF, news sources and the Universities web pages, here are my latest counts of what the riders' fate will be/has ben at the schools involved. I dont think my categorizations will be very controversial -- either they are "allowed to visit", "not allowed to visit" or I wasn't able to tell whether a visit was permitted. My definition of "allowed to visit" was: allowed on at least part of campus and allowed to interact with students.

Effectively barred from campus and/or student contact: Liberty, Regent, Oral Roberts, West Point

Allowed to visit campus: Lee, Union, OBU, Abeline*, Texas A&M*, Biola*, California Baptist, Azusa Pacific*, BYU, Colorado Christian*, Bethel*, Wheaton*,Eastern* (* indicates cooperative visit, with planned events)

Unknown: North Central, Air Force Academy (I couldn't find a reliable source on North Central ... SF's website was not clear about whether they would be on campus or not, and I could find no other source. The AF will aparently let the riders on campus, but whether there will be student contact, I could not determine.)

Counts:

No visit:4
Visit: 13
Unknown: 2

Venari, unless your definition of "allowed to visit" is really different than mine, you are just wrong about this.

In one place (and perhaps this is the confusion?) a SF press release states (as of March 6):

"Over the past year, [CCCU president] Andringa has encouraged CCCU schools to work with the Soulforce Equality Ride to schedule productive days of presentations and discussion. On that point, the riders have succeeded at a majority of schools on the route."

This is a reference to the 15 CCCU schools only, and indeed a MAJORITY of those -- as of march 6 -- were actively planning cooperative events, namely Abeline, Aszusa, Bethel, Biola, Colorado Christian, Eastern and Wheaton.

You have also accused SF of dishonesty in this matter, when it seems to me in fact they were being accurate.

Now, regarding CCCU itself: I read the article you referenced, and also SF's press release regarding their meeting with CCCU officials during the Equality Ride training. In that article (which I think must have prompted the rebuttal you linked) SF does quote CCCU president Bob Andringa. Both quotes indicate that the president shares some of SF's goals, but disagrees with others, and perhaps with the whole premise of the Equality Ride (article here: http://www.equalityride.com/article.php?article_id=182)

This article by SF, while polemical, does not ever claim the CCCU endorses or approves of the Equality Ride. Is there another source that you would like to point out, Venari, that makes this representation?

By the way, here is a quote from the president of CCCU from this article regarding the ride:

"But we can agree that the ride should advance education, civil dialogue, learning to respect differences, and making safe places for students exploring their own sexual identities."

Seems like a rahter odd, but diplomatic thing to say ... was it this quote that perhaps lead you to think that SF was claiming support from CCCU? The fact is that in this article of March 6, they never explicitly claim support, they merely quote the president of the CCCU itslef! In a rebuttal issued March 9th, the CCCU (perhaps embarassed by their own president's generous words, or whatever) issued the clarification you stated. SF, as far as I know, has NEVER CLAIMED SUPPORT from CCCU. I have to conclude that you are mistaken about this one as well Venari.

Then in regards to another student who contacted Jacob and Herrin directly and challenged them on things they have said they were informed that Jacob or Herrin will no longer have further discussions with them on this matter. This is strongly seen in the issues with North Central University. Where Jacob sated a student can be expelled for openly identifying as gay which is false and the rules were just changed as a response to what one of the equality riders did last year. Yet the school offered for the in question rider to sign a waver so they can discuss the facts with Soulforce and the rider has refused. So the school cannot fully comment because Jacob and Herrin are preventing them from speaking the truth, or what the school has discovered to be the truth.

To be quite frank, I have no idea what is going on here, SF's press materials are inconclusive, saying only that "contact has been cut off" with North Central, and I can find no other sources. Your stories above, Venari, are vague, lack specifics and are not verifiable, When did Jacob mis-state the facts, and to whom? What student is the student in question, and what was the matter about which he contacted Jacob and Herrin? You can't accuse someone of dishonesty without presenting evidence. I see none in what you've said about this matter, because I see no specifics. I'm not saying there hasn't been any misrepresentation about North Central --- the whole thing has a wierd, bad smell about it. If there has, I will be first one to write an email to the person involved asking for the situation to be made whole. But from what I've read here and elsewhere about this situation, I have absolutely no idea what is going on and can't conclude anything.

So how can I, or any other faculty or student, take anything the Equality Ride says to be true when they refuse to discuss issues that conflict with what they claim to be true then actively prevent us from being able to discuss them.

I guess looking at it I am seeing a truly great and just message being soiled by the actions of leaders more concerned with their agenda and not the truth of their message.
-Venari

Let's take stock:

Of the three main charges of dishonesty/misrepresentation you made above, two seem to be basically false from all of the research I've been able to do. The other is neither true nor false, but rather it is vague. I would love to look into it more if you would be able to provide details that can be looked into.

In any case, please stop making accusations of dishonesty that prove to be just false. You seem like a basically thoughtful, decent person, and perhaps you have other sources, other than the many that I consulted to write this post, that will prove me wrong. Who knows? Whatever the truth is, that's where I'll throw my lot ... In the mean time, why did you make these two aparently false accusations?

Ok ... against my better judgement, I'm going to break my own promise from the beginning of this too-long post and bring up my favorite topic one more time:

Venari: does your school have discriminatory language on its books? Just yes or no?

schoolboi

04-04-2006, 09:14 AM

Great post Matt. Thank you.

Venari

04-04-2006, 11:25 AM

Effectively barred from campus and/or student contact: Liberty, Regent, Oral Roberts, West Point

Allowed to visit campus: Lee, Union, OBU, Abeline*, Texas A&M*, Biola*, California Baptist, Azusa Pacific*, BYU, Colorado Christian*, Bethel*, Wheaton*,Eastern* (* indicates cooperative visit, with planned events)

Unknown: North Central, Air Force Academy (I couldn't find a reliable source on North Central ... SF's website was not clear about whether they would be on campus or not, and I could find no other source. The AF will aparently let the riders on campus, but whether there will be student contact, I could not determine.)

Counts:

No visit:4
Visit: 13
Unknown: 2

Venari, unless your definition of "allowed to visit" is really different than mine, you are just wrong about this.

In one place (and perhaps this is the confusion?) a SF press release states (as of March 6):

This is a reference to the 15 CCCU schools only, and indeed a MAJORITY of those -- as of march 6 -- were actively planning cooperative events, namely Abeline, Aszusa, Bethel, Biola, Colorado Christian, Eastern and Wheaton.

First, you’re showing the twisting I am beginning to expect. May of the schools have are taking the stance the Equality Ride is going to come but were going to grant you a forum but were not going to bar you from campus. So let’s break it down realistically.

Schools where the riders are not welcome, may face arrest;
Air Force Academy, Liberty, North Central, Oral Roberts, Regent, West Point

Campuses that are not inviting the riders but will not bar them from campus;
Lee, Union, OBU, Biola, California Baptist, BYU, Colorado Christian*,Azusa* Pacific

Campuses that cooperated with the Equality Ride;
Abeline, Texas A&M, Bethel, Wheaton ,Eastern

*These schools are allowing the Equality Ride onto campus but not allowing for forums or distribution of literature.

Break down;
Schools not invited to = 12
Schools invited to = 5

Schools not sponsoring any activities = 10
Schools sponsoring events = 5
Schools allowning limited events = 2

Needless to say we may disagree with what is cooperation but when a school says were not going to invite you but were not going to arrest you, like most have. That means that they are not cooperating with you.

This is just it. I see your post a spin on the facts. The fact is most of the schools have not invited the Equality Ride onto their campuses, and given the no choice in the visit they are deciding not to bar or arrest the riders.

To be quite frank, I have no idea what is going on here, SF's press materials are inconclusive, saying only that "contact has been cut off" with North Central, and I can find no other sources. Your stories above, Venari, are vague, lack specifics and are not verifiable, When did Jacob mis-state the facts, and to whom? What student is the student in question, and what was the matter about which he contacted Jacob and Herrin? You can't accuse someone of dishonesty without presenting evidence. I see none in what you've said about this matter, because I see no specifics. I'm not saying there hasn't been any misrepresentation about North Central --- the whole thing has a wierd, bad smell about it. If there has, I will be first one to write an email to the person involved asking for the situation to be made whole. But from what I've read here and elsewhere about this situation, I have absolutely no idea what is going on and can't conclude anything.

I have posed the links before but Jacob has called NCU "decidedly unchristian." He stated that students can be expelled just being gay, which if completely false. About the specific student I cannot tell you who he is because the of the refusal to sign the release allowing the school to address their charges against the school. So Jacob is saying false things about NCU.

Additionally, the Equality Ride website says they wanted to create a fruitful day of dialogue, yet they do not say how wanted to film a documentary on campus. Which is one of the main reasons why NCU is refusing to allow them onto campus. They are being charged with things and when offering to respond to those charges they are unable to. So why should there be any cooperation on our part and why should we believe anything the Equality Ride has to say.

Matt,
You are missing the bigger picture. I am gay student at a school being visited by the Equality Ride. But everything I am saying is what I am seeing. I strongly support the goals of the Equality ride, but I am seeing these things. So how can I or another person who doesn’t support the goals of the Equality Ride take your message seriously when we see such actions that we perceive to be misleading, slandering and misrepresenting us?

I am not here to cause problems but I am here to honestly present what I am seeing.

And my answer is a Yes with an IF and a No with a BUT. That’s the best answer I can give you.

Finally, Shoolboi I bluntly present my thoughts and perspectives because I feel sugar coating then would get no where. I feel by only directly stating what I am thinking will there be understanding. Sure what I say may upset some people but I am not going to apologize for what I think. Because if my thoughts are incorrect I want to correct them. Which rises my point, I feel you are really unwilling to listen to what I am going to say ... I am honest that I am in opposition to the methods of the Equality Ride and but I am not in opposition to its message. I feel you fail to respect that common ground between us so I am no longer going to respond to anything you may choose to say. I am sorry but I am here and I return to my school in my best efforts to bridge communications where I can tell my colleagues about the people and hopefully you will know and understand the same.

-Venari

keltic63

04-04-2006, 11:41 AM

Certain practices that are forbidden in Scripture are not permitted in the lives of the members of the North Central Community. Sexual relationships outside of marriage, homosexual relationships, pornography, theft, drunkenness, dishonesty (including cheating and plagiarism), and disobedience to the government (except in those rare instances where obedience to civil authority would violate a biblically informed conscience) are examples of practices that are unacceptable.

Sexual Behaviors

NCU expects all members of the community to refrain from any form of sexual immorality including but not limited to: adultery, promiscuity, any form of extramarital sexual activity (touching of intimate parts with or without clothing), homosexual behavior, or viewing pornography. Co-habitation is also considered unacceptable. Discretion is expected in the public display of affection.

Are these the guidelines that we seem to be have trouble finding and then discussing?

As far as I can tell, North Central is the only AG school on the Equality Ride. If these policies, listed at the North Central website are current, then I believe that the Equality Ride is justified for making the stop at NCU.

http://www.northcentral.edu/studentlife/guide/community.php

http://www.northcentral.edu/admissions/responsibilities.php

Venari

04-04-2006, 04:22 PM

Are these the guidelines that we seem to be have trouble finding and then discussing?

As far as I can tell, North Central is the only AG school on the Equality Ride. If these policies, listed at the North Central website are current, then I believe that the Equality Ride is justified for making the stop at NCU.

Keltic,

You have posted this once before. But the issue is not if NCU is wrong in its policy. The issue is how the Equality Ride is interacting with the school. If NCU is wrong and the Equality Ride is wrong in how they are interacting with the school then we are not coming to what is the right thing in this situation.

-Venari

keltic63

04-04-2006, 04:31 PM

Keltic,

You have posted this once before. But the issue is not if NCU is wrong in its policy. The issue is how the Equality Ride is interacting with the school. If NCU is wrong and the Equality Ride is wrong in how they are interacting with the school then we are not coming to what is the right thing in this situation.

-Venari
perhaps, but you've avoided answering it before, as well as avoiding answering it in Matt's post. I guess you'll avoid answering it here again.

Venari

04-04-2006, 05:56 PM

perhaps, but you've avoided answering it before, as well as avoiding answering it in Matt's post. I guess you'll avoid answering it here again.

But we have discussed this topic in my first post; http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=308&page=4

As I said I cannot bring my answer down to a yes or no. There are many factors that come into play that effect me and my community. The rules changed after as a result of the actions from a former student. But the new rules are stricter against homosexuality then before. While before the stance was "hands off" that is to tolerate but not yet accept until a full decision was made was much better then the stance we have now of forbidding until we can make a decision.

There is one thing that seems to be missing. The major difference between acceptance and tolerance. No one will ever fully accept other people... we may accept most of them but we tolerate the rest we don’t like. The same goes for sexuality... people are not required to accept anything but it is necessary to tolerate the differences in other people. But tolerance can only go so far which leads to the issue of "fall out."

Is the rule change due to plain intolerance or is it because of a failure to reach out and illustrate how our reaction is wrong and redirect to the right path. Personally calling someone "unchristian" and stating falsehoods about them is not the way to redirect.

-Venari

themattperry

04-05-2006, 08:43 PM

First, you’re showing the twisting I am beginning to expect. May of the schools have are taking the stance the Equality Ride is going to come but were going to grant you a forum but were not going to bar you from campus. So let’s break it down realistically.

Schools where the riders are not welcome, may face arrest;
Air Force Academy, Liberty, North Central, Oral Roberts, Regent, West Point

Campuses that are not inviting the riders but will not bar them from campus;
Lee, Union, OBU, Biola, California Baptist, BYU, Colorado Christian*,Azusa* Pacific

Campuses that cooperated with the Equality Ride;
Abeline, Texas A&M, Bethel, Wheaton ,Eastern

*These schools are allowing the Equality Ride onto campus but not allowing for forums or distribution of literature.

Break down;
Schools not invited to = 12
Schools invited to = 5

Schools not sponsoring any activities = 10
Schools sponsoring events = 5
Schools allowning limited events = 2

Needless to say we may disagree with what is cooperation but when a school says were not going to invite you but were not going to arrest you, like most have. That means that they are not cooperating with you.

This is just it. I see your post a spin on the facts. The fact is most of the schools have not invited the Equality Ride onto their campuses, and given the no choice in the visit they are deciding not to bar or arrest the riders.

Who's really spinning here Venari!? What you claimed in an earlier post was the "dishonestly" perpetrated by SF was the following:

I had addressed issues of how Jacob and Herrin have misrepresented important facts ... like saying in several interviews "Most of the schools are allowing them to visit."

By your own calculations above (which are incorrect, see below) this charge that you make is simply false. I take "allowing them to visit" at face value (ie -- to mean "not preventing a visit") (btw, you did not say "cooperating" in your original charge, you switched to that word in your response.) I'm not trying to spin anything! I just took your own words for what they most commonly mean to most people and tried to evaluate your charges of dishonesty. It is simply true that most schools on the route ARE "allowing SF to visit." It is also true that a majority of CCCU schools (the 15) are actually coordinating with SF to plan visits and events. As far as I can tell, this is not spin, but reality!!! (thank God)

Just in case you don't believe me, maybe you believe the San Francisco Chronicle. Here's what they report about visits to two campuses you characterize above as "not inviting the riders but will not bar them from campus":

But in Southern California this week, the gay and lesbian Christians are drawing a much different response: An official welcome.

"We're at a place where we really want to learn from these students," said John W. Back, dean of students at Biola University in La Mirada (Orange County), which prepared for Tuesday's visit for several months. The school might have had a different response three years ago, he said, but now "we're praying for other institutions that they be at a place where they're able to do this."

Administrators at Azusa Pacific University, where the bus stops today, have planned a wide range of meetings between those on the bus and student leaders and top university officials.

"We thought this would be a wonderful opportunity to allow for interaction and conversation for folks who share different viewpoints," said Maureen Taylor, spokeswoman for Azusa Pacific.

Officials at both schools said this openness does not signal that they are changing their beliefs on homosexuality, but that conservative churches are shifting how they respond to gay and lesbian people.

"We've realized we have some things to learn," Back said.

"Wonderful oportunity" -- "Wide range of meetings" -- "Top University Officials" --- "praying for other institutions" ???? Is this spin too? Twisting? Since your are refuted by the words of college officials at the schools in question, I don't think so. Are you at least willing to consider now that this charge against SF (forgetting for a moment the other ones) might not be so accurate?

I really just have to guess that these charges you are making come from a place of pain. I can hear, Venari, that you are hurt by SF coming to your school, and perhaps by some of the things that have been said about your school, by Jake, Herrin ... whoever. But it is not ok to be so angry and hurt that you end up saying things that aren't true .... Or rather I should say ... it's ok to be as angry and hurt as you need to be ... or however you feel. It's not OK to make false charges against people.

And my answer is a Yes with an IF and a No with a BUT. That’s the best answer I can give you.

With all due respect, the question I asked (do your school's policies contain discriminatory language?) is very simple and does not require a complex answer. Either a College has or does not have discriminatory language on its books. It's simply not very hard to tell. I was just wondering if you think your college does .... I'm not trying to corner you ... I actually sort of wanted to know whether perhaps you thought your college's rules did NOT contain this kind of language -- if there was some interpretation you were applying that rendered the language non-discriminatory. Because if I were at a college that did NOT have language like that and the Ride showed up, I would be angry too! But you have been clear -- I guess you can't provide a simple answer, and that is OK with me. I'll be happy to draw my own conclusions.

I want to make it clear that I am NOT trying to discredit you Venari. I want to repeat also that I think you are a reasonable, good person. You've proven that, and I repsect you -- heck I enjoy talking about these things with you. So far, this debate has been helpful to me. i just don't think that you are right about a couple of these things, and I think you would have to agree that some of what you said in your last post on this matter was in fact inaccurate.

keltic63

04-05-2006, 09:13 PM

But we have discussed this topic in my first post; http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=308&page=4

As I said I cannot bring my answer down to a yes or no. There are many factors that come into play that effect me and my community. The rules changed after as a result of the actions from a former student. But the new rules are stricter against homosexuality then before. While before the stance was "hands off" that is to tolerate but not yet accept until a full decision was made was much better then the stance we have now of forbidding until we can make a decision.

There is one thing that seems to be missing. The major difference between acceptance and tolerance. No one will ever fully accept other people... we may accept most of them but we tolerate the rest we don’t like. The same goes for sexuality... people are not required to accept anything but it is necessary to tolerate the differences in other people. But tolerance can only go so far which leads to the issue of "fall out."

Is the rule change due to plain intolerance or is it because of a failure to reach out and illustrate how our reaction is wrong and redirect to the right path. Personally calling someone "unchristian" and stating falsehoods about them is not the way to redirect.

-Venari
and once again, I ask, are the policies described in the quotes and links, discriminatory or not?

Venari

04-06-2006, 01:24 AM

I want to make it clear that I am NOT trying to discredit you Venari. I want to repeat also that I think you are a reasonable, good person. You've proven that, and I repsect you -- heck I enjoy talking about these things with you. So far, this debate has been helpful to me. i just don't think that you are right about a couple of these things, and I think you would have to agree that some of what you said in your last post on this matter was in fact inaccurate.

Matt,

I appreciate what you said. As I have said before we support the same goals but though very different means. That said we see things in a very different light and have access to different information that leads us to our conclusions.

That said I do feel Jacob and Herrin are twisting events to portray things to their favour. This is from my view the schools are not inviting or welcoming them to campus, yet they are not taking the steps to threaten arrest so that means, to me, the bottom line is the Equality Ride is not welcome but the school is choosing not to exercise their right to arrest the riders... which I will say is stance that the schools should take.

But it also boils down to other issues of slander. As in the March issue of Lavender Magazine Jacob called North Central University "Decidedly unchristian." Pared with what is on the Soul force website, north central (http://www.equalityride.com/northcentral), NCU has never expelled a student just for being gay. I have been openly gay for over 3 years and I have never faced any sort of discrimination or referral to conversion therapy ... my decision to attend an ex-gay ministry was my own choice and over all most people at my school do not know I have gone. As for the issue of former students I cannot discuss them because of legal reasons, all I can say is from my own experience.

Which is why I cannot give a direct answer about the policies, yes hey have recently changed to include homosexuality but that is in response to the actions of another gay student. But they only serve as clarifies to homosexuality immorality is considered equal with heterosexual immorality, that is any sexual activity outside of marriage. So yes homosexuality is listed but not in a manner that I consider to be discriminatory, once you look at the larger picture I feel this is seen.

But there is a fact it can be twisted and interpreted as such to offer room to discriminate against homosexual students. If such an incident occurs it will be met by the outcry of many students. As things are we are in an attempt to find a balance of maintaining our foundation and creating a welcoming atmosphere. Needless to say there are two forms of change; the first violent and drastic change like a volcano erupting, or the slow process of metamorphosis that can take a while but in the end emerges as something beautiful. This is where I feel Soulforce is failing. A few of these schools are in the metamorphosis process and there is the failure to recognize this change in progress and the insistence that things move as they want ... for those of you missing what I am saying here it is;

When your interrupt the metamorphosis you often kill the organism changing and you will never see the beauty it can become.

So that is where I see Soulforce and the Equality Ride failing. You are killing the very thing you are seeking to create.

-Venari

SteveSGU

04-16-2006, 02:30 PM

closetcougar

04-16-2006, 07:38 PM

Counts:

No visit:4
Visit: 13
Unknown: 2

Venari, unless your definition of "allowed to visit" is really different than mine, you are just wrong about this.

My question is this: How many welcomes has Soulforce abused by insisting on doing something to be arrested? If I'm not mistaken, that has happened at most of the 13 universities in your count above. Even pro-gay people are saying that the Riders are causing more problems than they are solving by "not allowing any limitations on the dialogue." (What dialogue, when you are insulting people by silently pretending to die in representation of the people we are supposedly "killing" with our sincere beliefs?)

The Equality Riders I spoke to were nice people, but they are diminishing their own effectiveness by seeking publicity by breaking the law.

Steve

Nor should there be any limitations on this dialogue. Why should we apologize for demanding rights that everyone has access to. And why should we demand any less. To demand less is a lie. I was at the BYU stop. I am a BYU student. I won't take credit for this analogy. Another gay student from BYU shared it while SF was here. I hope it is coherent.
It was either in a bug's life or the movie antz when grasshopper A punishes an ant for getting out of line and tells grasshopper B that he has to exert his authority whenever he can so that the ants don't get out of line. Grasshopper B doesn't understand why b/c the ants are so small and powerless. So grasshopper A throws a seed at him and asks "did that hurt?'' Grasshopper B chuckles and says, "no." Then grasshopper A throws a bunch of seeds at grasshopper B and says "did that hurt?" Grasshopper B says "yeah." And then grasshopper A says, "see you don't ever want to let them know how much power they have if they band together."
What SF did was create a place in which we could have an open dialoque and the effects WILL last. We are already planning another Lilly Procession next year to commemorate the suicides of the gay mormons that were remembered this year. The rest of the week after SF visit, we had discussions in all of my classes about SF visit and homosexuality. Most of the students were tolerant of differing opinions, at the very least. Before SF came, I was scared to say anything, but after watching Haven and Jacob and the other riders demand equality and nothing less, I realized that I have absolutely nothing to apologize for, and short of getting kicked out for actually being gay, I won't apologize for disapproving of derogatory name calling or misinformed stereotypes. And when I graduate, I will continue to fight against the BYU policy, from outside of the closet. They have shown me that it is possible and that if you want things to change, you are inevitably going to piss some people off.

Liberal Crozier

04-16-2006, 08:29 PM

Revisionist history is becoming very popular, and reading the thematic posts in this thread, including the one tonight that precipitated this response, I just wonder what would have happened if:

1) Martin Luther would have asked permission to post his theological disputations on the cathedral door?

or more specific to the Equality Riders, I wonder what would have happened if:

1) The Freedom Riders would have asked the Southern governors, mayor and their Dixiecrat Jim Crow representatives in the Congress for permission to organise the Freedom Ride and allow them to set both the agenda and the strategies used to end bigotry, hatred, murder, inequality ...not to mention theocratic support for segregation, and proscriptions against interracial marriage.

There is a fact in human dynamics......you must define yourself and your purposes and motivations,... you never allow your enemies to define you....and that is what our enemies are doing on a global scale.

To work is to pray (laborare est orare). The work of justice begins with one step and not cursing the darkness....

closetcougar

04-16-2006, 11:14 PM

peaceboy

04-17-2006, 12:57 AM

I haven't had a chance to read all of the posts, but I am a little surprised that no one has mentioned Martin Luther King, Jr. He did something radical by staging sit ins and disrupting the segregated society's order. Rosa Parks did the same thing. The past civil rights movements are filled by people who are willing to have peaceful protests even at the stake of being arrested or harassed or abused, having rights taken away before they were gained back with more equality than before. We look back at them with romanticized views, but the fact is that they were detested and despised as much as the equality riders are today. We must never forget this on our journey to equality and true freedom!

tdogg

04-17-2006, 11:06 AM

Change isn't made by lying around waiting for an engraved invitation. It is made by making informed decisions to blaze a path where none has been blazed, to force those in fear and ignorance to confront the issues of which they are most afraid and ignorant, to take a stance for something we believe in and follow through with actions (albeit non-violent actions).

Jesus didn't spread his message of love and salvation by sitting around in Jerusalem and waiting for those to come who wanted to listen to him - he went out and about, speaking, teaching and preaching to those who were afraid of Him, uncomfortable with His message and His presence, abusing to those less fortunate and/or different from them (them being the religious and political leaders of His day) - He didn't wait for engraved invitations, He took a pro-active approach and went for it. He wasn't all that popular as a whole, His message wasn't all that well-received, most people wanted to be left alone with their personal opinions and beliefs but Jesus didn't allow for that. He got His message across.

That is all the Equality Riders are doing. They aren't beating anyone up. They aren't threatening them with violence or emotional abuse. They are taking a pro-active stance for equal rights for everyone, which is basically the premise of this country in which we all live. They are brave in confronting those who are afraid and ignorant, those who are unwelcoming and have a closed-minded attitude. The Equality Riders are doing what most of us just dream of doing, a positive high-impact action to get the message across to those who otherwise wouldn't be open to thinking about it on their own. There would be no formal invitation, no acceptance dinners, no schedules of open-minded dialogue set up by the political and religious leaders of these schools. If the Equality Riders waited for a formal invitation to come to the schools and speak, they probably would have made it to very few of the schools if any...

Daniel

04-17-2006, 11:28 AM

Change isn't made by lying around waiting for an engraved invitation.

The work of justice begins with one step and not cursing the darkness....

You both made me smile wide- this- the day after Easter. Thank you for your well-formed words. I will remember them and take them to heart.

NathanATX

04-17-2006, 11:33 AM

When I was in Oklahoma last weekend, someone said the senator's actions were overturned.

I haven't found anything that confirms it, though...

themattperry

04-17-2006, 12:53 PM

It's good to see this thread revived somewhat ... I never did get a sense of peace about it.

This discussion had its origins -- or at least some part of its origins -- in one student's anger about the aftermath of a SF visit to a school, and charges that SF leaders were engaging in inflamatory and dishonest speech. I argued against this, asking for proof. None was forthcoming, and it's my belief that those accusations came out of anger and frustration.

I think I can -- to a certain point -- empathize with this point of view. When SF comes on to a campus, they provide comfort and voice to gay students under threat and in the closet, but I think we should also realize that they must scare the hell out of some closeted students. The closet is a place where one finds a survival strategy. Any force that comes in and threatens to upset an equilibrium under which one has learned to survive in a hostile environment can be seen as a threat. In other words, I think we usually choose the misery we know over the risky liberation that we don't know. This also explains the strident self-identified conservatism in which many glbt kids live before coming out. At least this is my experience, and it's almost certainly why some sympathetic people at the schools have been launching atacks agains SF and its leadership.

However, I also know that the Gospel was never meant to be comfortable -- it was meant to be liberating. (This is certainly my experience of the Gospel!) Through the word we are called out of dark places and scared compromises into the full light of living. This calling is not always polite, but definitely loving. It is not always tactful, but definitely truthful. It does not ask permission, but rather includes us all by default.

My 2 cents/