Student Expelled For Coming Out

[Joe Brummer]

Student Expelled For Coming Out
by The Associated Press
April 8, 2006 - 11:00 am ET

(Williamsburg, Kentucky) A University of Cumberlands student who revealed he was gay on a personal Web page has been expelled.

Jason Johnson, 20, of Lexington, was asked to leave the small Baptist school earlier this week, according to Larry Cockrum, director of media relations at the university.

Johnson's dismissal came after he posted on his Web page at the popular Internet site MySpace.com that he was gay. The university has a policy that says it reserves the right to expel a student who "promotes sexual behavior not consistent with Christian principles," including homosexuality.


Continue reading (http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/04/040806kySchool.htm)

[schoolboi]

I think we should do some kind of rapid response. It would tie in great with the EQ Ride. Jamie is this near you at all?

[Joe Brummer]

Flood the Papers in that area with letters to the editor educating people on the issue. The school may respond to the bad press.

[pnggrad79]

Joe, I would like to respond, but don't know the email address of this place. Do you know it?

pnggrad

[Jamie McDaniel]

I did a search on MySpace. Let's show him support.
http://www.myspace.com/runnienoz

And if his MySpace webpage is any indication, he's coming out big time. Good for him. :rainbow:

Jamie is this near you at all?
Cumberland College is located in Williamsburg, which is 2 hours south of Lexington. According to the article, Jason is from Lexington.

[Jennifer5]

Yeah, he really has come out.... I guess he doesn't have to many questions... he seems very comfortable;)

[Emproph]

They have a theater arts program you can major in? So they were asking for it?
-Why not just put a sign in the window saying “Gay Homosexual Female Impersonator Drag Queens NEEDED for enrollment.” ...I’m just saying it would’ve been more subtle... :D

-A snippet of that is serious though from what his friend said, “...the amount of gay people at our school.”

What hit’s me, and this may be typical of these schools, is that they may know for certain that some students are gay, but once it’s on the internet, technically it’s in print, albeit electronic, but they then have verifiable proof to ‘justify’ their actions. Conversations are more difficult to prove in discrimination court.

Might want to flood the mainstream media too.
-In fact we might want to get into the habit of doing so. :rainbow:

[zacxdreyer09]

Hi everyone, I just joined soulforce. As I have read you guys are doing everything you can to help my boyfriend, Jason Johnson, through this whole ordeal. Thank you, your support is greatly appreciated.


Thanks for everything,
Zac

[Jamie McDaniel]

Hi Zac, we're glad you found us. I forwarded the link to the article Joe posted onto the Equality Riders (http://www.equalityride.com) because what they are on the road speaking out against is happening in our state too.

--------------

So I'm working on my letter to the newspaper. Here's the first draft.

Dear Editor,

I read with sadness the news of the University of the Cumberlands expelling student Jason Johnson for revealing on his personal webpage at MySpace.com that he is gay.

President Jim Taylor defended the Southern Baptist school’s action by stating, “We are different by design, and are non-apologetic about our Christian beliefs.”

It is bad enough that the school administration committed this sin, but they double it when they link their discrimination to Jesus. To comprehend how they could justify such injustice, one must be aware of the history of the Southern Baptist Convention. They are the one denomination born specifically out of a belief that slavery was biblical. In the 161 years since they broke away from other Baptists, they have exchanged one prejudice for another – favoring slavery and Jim Crow laws, opposing women’s suffrage, resisting civil rights for blacks, limiting women’s role in ministry, and fighting against equality for gays and lesbians. A review of history shows Southern Baptists have done all these things while citing scripture.

Southern Baptist fundamentalists may never understand how expelling students due to sexual orientation is unfair, but middle America is certainly coming around. Actually, some Southern Baptists in the pew are starting to see the injustice as well. Sadly, when they voice their beliefs against discrimination, they too find themselves in trouble with the leaders of their denomination.

[Jennifer5]

Welcome Zac! I was hoping one or both of you would show up here. While looking through his myspace, it sounds like he thinks very highly of you... welcome:)

[Mia14]

Welcome, Zac! We're so happy to have you here!

It's hard to believe that what happened to your boyfriend happens in this country, where we pretend to put such high priority on personal freedom.


You're among friends here. Welcome.

[zacxdreyer09]

Thanks for the warm welcome everyone. I cannot thank you guys enough for the support that you have offered to Jason. He really needs it right now. If anyone has any questions about Jason's story feel free to let me know, I would be more than happy to answer them.

[Jamie McDaniel]

If anyone has any questions about Jason's story feel free to let me know, I would be more than happy to answer them.
Zac, the article did not go into details about how the school went about expelling Jason. Did someone show the school administration his webpage and then they immediately expelled him? Did he have a meeting with the school president? Are these some things you can share with us?

[Joe Brummer]

Great letter Jamie.

I also think it is good we are following the steps of nonviolence.

1. Gather information from all sides including the school
2. Education of all parties invovled including the school and Soulforce
3. Negotiation. Lets negotiate with the school or try to before doing anything else.
4. Self purification. For most of the civil rights movement MLK had people in the churches singing and praying nightly to renew commitment to the cause. We need to do some type of self commitment before taking any action to insure we remain nonviolent in our words and our actions.
5. Direct Action. If neccessary this is a good place for the Freedom Riders to pay a visit to the school on Jason's behalf. Assuming her would be okay with it. This is only to provide tension enough to bring the school to the table to work on step #4.
6. Reconcilitation. The goal of nonviolence is always reconciliation. You can skip around all the other steps, even not use some, but you must use this one! This is were we find a win-win solution for everyone including the school.



Emorph: Thank YOU! THat was a sweet thing to say!

[zacxdreyer09]

We had just gotten back from EKU, where I attend. He was picking me up for the weekend so that I could hang out with him and see the play that he was stage managing. However, he was running a little late he said that I could sit in on his Chorale class. Upon entering the music building at the University of the Cumberlands, he was instructed to go to the Office of Student Services, Col. Colegrove's office (I do believe, Jason would know more of the details)... he was then shown a picture of his myspace homepage (www.myspace.com/runnienoz) and was asked if it was him. Jason, being proud of who he is, said that it infact was his. He was then handed a letter and read a section of the hand book that says, and I quote...

"Any student who engages in or promotes sexual behavior not consistant with Christian principles (including sex outside marriage and homosexuality) may be suspended or asked to leave the University of the Cumberlands."

He was then told that he had to be out of University housing that night, no ifs, ands, or buts. Later that night he went to see if he could say goodbye to all of his friends, he was told by several faculty memebers that he wasn't allowed on University grounds and that he could be arrested for tresspassing.

Litterally, the only reason he was asked to leave was because he is gay. He was also told that someone, an anonymous person, reported him. We, however, don't know how much truth is in that statement... and it could have been a witch hunt.



Well, that's how it happened. Any other questions?


Thanks again for your support!

[zacxdreyer09]

Oh, and about that bit from the hand book, it was added this year! Jason was about to finish his sophmore year there... he had decided to to there before that was put into the handbook!

[cris]

Zac,
God bless you for being there for Jason at this time. Rejection, in particular at the hands of those who are supposed to represent Christ, is painful, even if it is a benefit to him later. (And I believe living openly and honestly is a very healthy way to be.)
Thanks also for explaining about how Jason was expelled. I really wonder how these folks get involved in perusing websites, obviously with an agenda in mind. Pitiful!
I wish you could meet my cousin in Corbin and her partner of 27 years.
Warm regards-

[zacxdreyer09]

I'm just glad that I could be there for him... it has been tough on him but he's doing a lot better!

[Jennifer5]

I'm glad you're there for him. Be sure to tell us if you have any ideas of how we can help:love:

[Joe Brummer]

Please let us know how Jason would feel about being the catalyst for a movement against this college?

[zacxdreyer09]

He wouldn't mind at all... we've talked about this... and he is really excited about it!

[Daniel]

Literally, the only reason he was asked to leave was because he is gay. He was also told that someone, an anonymous person, reported him. We, however, don't know how much truth is in that statement... and it could have been a witch hunt.

If experience proves any help, a similar thing happened at my school many years ago when 4 guys senior to me were expelled. They were turned in by another gay student- a Mr. Anonymous- a true case of internalized homophobia. Whether this happened in Jason's case or not remains to be seen, but one wonders who's doing the snooping and why.

My thoughts and prayers are with you both- please hang on tight to each other- it may be a rough ride for a bit.

Your beau has found a true friend in you.

[Foeke]

Isn't there any anti-discrimination law that could provide him or any other Kentucky resident from these blatant acts of discrimination? This is ridiculous.

[trulyme212]

Wow....this whole thing is crazy!

Everyone has good ideas and it was an excellent letter.

I'm so glad to witness how supportive everyone really is....

and Zac welcome....you are doing a fabulous job....I have to ask however....How are YOU doing?

This must be stressful and difficult for you also.....

Keep up the good work everyone!

[themattperry]

I'll be thinking about you guys and your communities today. I'm sure that this goes for many of us here.

[themattperry]

Isn't there any anti-discrimination law that could provide him or any other Kentucky resident from these blatant acts of discrimination? This is ridiculous.

Unfortunately, Foeke, only a small number (maybe a 1/4) of US states protect glbt people from discrimination in housing, employment etc .... My rather liberal state of Washington just recently enacted a measure like this.

What's worse, even these protections do not usually apply to private religious institutions.

God bless America. ;-)

[zacxdreyer09]

To those concerned about me, I am a little stressed out but I am doing everything in my power to help Jason out. It is the least that I can do. Jason spoke with his attorney today... they are going to get the story into as many print medias that they can. If you live in or around KY check the newspapers!

Thanks again to everyone, I really cannot say how much your support is helping Jason through this tough time!

Much Love,
Zac

[Jamie McDaniel]

...they are going to get the story into as many print medias that they can.
The story alone should get media coverage, but another option is to hold a vigil outside the school. Since Williamsburg is 2 hours from Lexington, I'm not sure how many from Lexington would directly participate in such a vigil. Zac, do you have a sense of how many supportive people from the University of the Cumberlands and surrounding universities might want to do something like that? Jason left a message on my cell, so I can discuss it with him too. Also, are Jason and your parents supportive?

[NathanATX]

dhoneycu@ucumberlands.edu,
lbartram@ucumberlands.edu,
apilant@ucumberlands.edu,
dwhitake@ucumberlands.edu,
bherron@ucumberlands.edu,
dharp@ucumberlands.edu,
christyleefoster@yahoo.com
football@ucumberlands.edu,
kstrebec@ucumberlands.edu,
mac@ucumberlands.edu,
mcole@ucumberlands.edu,
lcarter@ucumberlands.edu,
jbourne@ucumberlands.edu,
studentgov@ucumberlands.edu,
alumni@cumberlandcollege.edu,
rvernon@ucumberlands.edu,
bsergent@ucumberlands.edu,
lwest@ucumberlands.edu,
dbutcher@ucumberlands.edu,
mvernon@ucumberlands.edu,
mirvin@ucumberlands.edu,
nbellman@ucumberlands.edu,
emahan@ucumberlands.edu,
chking@ucumberlands.edu,
pneto@ucumberlands.edu,
tbrooks@ucumberlands.edu,
abassoff@ucumberlands.edu,
grach@ucumberlands.edu,
adean@ucumberlands.edu,
mstump@ucumberlands.edu,
jwake@ucumberlands.edu,
jedwards@ucumberlands.edu,
jdclifton@hotmail.com
lilcheer@hotmail.com
lilcheer@hotmail.com
lilcheer@hotmail.com
fbanks@ucumberlands.edu,
Coach_Shultz@hotmail.com
gnelson@ucumberlands.edu,
britbecker@hotmail.com
angel17blue03@hotmail.com
illyssaleisure@hotmail.com
wkp22284@hotmail.com
girlwrassler@netscape.net
telsarr@aol.com
swilham@ucumberlands.edu,
kwyatt@ucumberlands.edu,

esansale@ucumberlands.edu,
ctan@ucumberlands.edu,

fstroud@ucumberlands.edu,
aghioroaie@ucumberlands.edu,
wtemple@ucumberlands.edu,
phaus@ucumberlands.edu,
bstrebec@ucumberlands.edu,
jwake@ucumberlands.edu,
ahoward@ucumberlands.edu,
awalton@ucumberlands.edu,
amedders@ucumberlands.edu,
kflanik@ucumberlands.edu,
agibbs@ucumberlands.edu,
gallen@ucumberlands.edu,

rweedman@ucumberlands.edu,
mconn@ucumberlands.edu,
mdickman@ucumberlands.edu,

jwheeler@ucumberlands.edu,
jbourne@ucumberlands.edu,
mwhite@ucumberlands.edu,
ksemmel@ucumberlands.edu,
jwilliam@ucumberlands.edu,
mworthin@ucumberlands.edu,
Canderso@ucumberlands.edu,
nfoster@ucumberlands.edu,
sdavis@ucumberlands.edu,
tfish@ucumberlands.edu,
tfrazier@ucumberlands.edu,
jsharp@ucumberlands.edu,
gherring@ucumberlands.edu,
kfish@ucumberlands.edu,
tdickman@ucumberlands.edu,
nbowden@ucumberlands.edu,
jmarsh@ucumberlands.edu,
ldennis@ucumberlands.edu,
jsmoak@ucumberlands.edu,
rbyrd@ucumberlands.edu,
lchipe@ucumberlands.edu,
jcorcoran@ucumberlands.edu,
detter@ucumberlands.edu,
gmajors@ucumberlands.edu,
dthrelk@ucumberlands.edu,
thill@ucumberlands.edu,

[NathanATX]

Dear Brother & Sister in Christ,

I just became aware of the story of a young man at your university who was confronted with a printout from his myspace.com profile that identified him as a gay man. He was summarily expelled from your school.

How does his expulsion fit in with the message of Christ? Does that kind of action rise to the standard of "loving your neighbor?" I don't believe it does.

I believe such an action is tremendously damaging. This young man is now experiencing incredible trauma at the hands of your school's administration, people who SAY they are committed to be like Christ, simply because he is gay.

Don't you believe God loves gay people?

What do you think this young man's response to such a violent action is going to be? Do you think this is going to compel him to become straight? Do you think this action communicates God's love to him?

As someone who has been through a similar violent experience, I am very aware of the possible effects of such trauma.

Fear that God doesn't love him
A stark sense of alone-ness in the world
Grief and depression at the loss of relationships and a sense of one's place in the world
Becoming angry at God, church & anyone who is religious
Greatly diminished self-worth and the subsequent risky behavior... drinking too much, using drugs, promiscuity...
Suicide


The only result of such an action is to cause harm. My prayer for him is that he will surround himself with people that will speak the truth about who he is and who God created him to be. My prayer is that the impact of the violence your university has inflicted on him will be lessened because of people taking a strong stand of love & support for him.

My prayer for you, as a part of this University, is that you would realize what a great sin has been committed against this child of God in the name of Jesus. My prayer is that you will not be silent in the face of spiritual violence. My prayer is that you will be led by the love of God in spite of your uncertainties and questions about sexuality.

My prayer is for reconciliation. Please join me in this prayer.

Sincerely,

Nate Black
www.nateblack.us

[Emproph]

I just learned about Blind Carbon Copy, Bcc, when sending emails to multiple recipients in order to increase the likelihood of them being read, and to ensure the email privacy of those recipients.

In order to send a copy of an email message without the other email addresses showing you can use an option called Blind Carbon Copy, Bcc, as opposed to just Carbon Copy or Cc: underneath the To:, In Outlook Express, click on view and then check 'headers' and then Bcc will show right under Cc. I believe you put your address in the To: and the rest in Bcc, make sure there are comma's in between the addys. Does anyone know how to explain it better?

BCC link: http://www.rrudder.com/safe/bcc.html#Outlook_Express
Here’s the Google search I did for it: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22blind+copy%22+email+addresses

A few media links:
http://www.rumormillnews.com/MEDIA_EMAIL_ADDRESSES.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1228326/posts

-That last link is from 2004, not sure about the other one, I'll see if I can find a more current one later.
Don’t forget to separate with comma’s if they don't have them.
And be prepared to get responses, albeit probably mostly automatic ones.
I gotta go, I’ll see what I can find out later.

[Zerbie]

Nathan, what an excellent letter! Thank you!

I don't know what to say - I feel so angry imagining a person being forced out of housing without notice, and threatened with arrest for trespassing. I am so angry I'm spitting!

Zac - welcome. I wish you and Jason lots of strength getting through this challenge.

[NathanATX]

I'm ticked off too.

I wasn't sure if sending the email using BCC would be better or not... I've used both methods in the past.

Next, I'm going to write a compassionate/scathing letter to the editor... and send it all over their region.

We need to look up local churches, especially baptist ones, and be sending them these emails too.

[zacxdreyer09]

The story alone should get media coverage, but another option is to hold a vigil outside the school. Since Williamsburg is 2 hours from Lexington, I'm not sure how many from Lexington would directly participate in such a vigil. Zac, do you have a sense of how many supportive people from the University of the Cumberlands and surrounding universities might want to do something like that? Jason left a message on my cell, so I can discuss it with him too. Also, are Jason and your parents supportive?


I am pretty positive that a lot of people would want to do something like that. I am getting a lot of backing here at EKU and the support at UC is more than one could have suspected. Jason's parent's as far as I know are being very supportive on this whole issue. As for mine, well they haven't sent me their response to the email that I sent to them about it, but that doesn't mean they have had the time to get back to me about it.

Oh, tomorrow in the Lexington Hearald Leader there will be a follow up story with my interview along with interviews done by Jason's friends! Read it, if you are in or around Lexington.. if you are not then go to their website at www.kentucky.com and search for the story starting tomorrow!

Thanks again everyone!

Much love,
Zac

[NathanATX]

Call the university president, Mr. Taylor at 606-539-4201.

[zacxdreyer09]

Thanks to a very supportive person I have acquired President Taylor's personal cell number...


Here goes: 606-521-8054


Do what you will!

Much Love!

[NathanATX]

What is his full name & title? Mr./Dr./Rev....

[zacxdreyer09]

President James H Taylor.

[NathanATX]

I called his office at 606-539-4201 and asked for him. His secretary asked what this was regarding and I said:

"My name is Nathan Black and I just learned today that one of your students was expelled because it was discovered he was gay. I am upset about this and wanted to communicate my thoughts to Mr. Taylor. May I speak with him?"

-No, he's out of town.

"Ok, please let him know I called and that many people are upset and concerned about what happened. I hope that he will reconsider the decision."

-Thank you for calling.

"Have a good day."

[NathanATX]

I just sent this to several anchors at www.wlextv.com

****************************
Dear Ms. Cox, et. al:

This is the text of an email I have sent to the students, faculty & administration of the University of the Cumberlands.

Also, a gay christian organization that works to end this kind of violence has an active conversation about this situation at http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=460.

This is also VERY interesting in light of the Soulforce Equality Ride that has been getting a lot of news coverage across the nation. www.equalityride.com The Equality Ride bus is visiting religious universities that have policies that discriminate against gay & lesbian students.

I hope this helps you all!
Nate Black
512-947-5289
www.nateblack.us



Please stop spiritual violence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Brother & Sister in Christ,

I just became aware of the story of a young man at your university who was confronted with a printout from his myspace.com profile that identified him as a gay man. He was summarily expelled from your school.

How does his expulsion fit in with the message of Christ? Does that kind of action rise to the standard of "loving your neighbor?" I don't believe it does.

I believe such an action is tremendously damaging. This young man is now experiencing incredible trauma at the hands of your school's administration, people who SAY they are committed to be like Christ, simply because he is gay.

Don't you believe God loves gay people?

What do you think this young man's response to such a violent action is going to be? Do you think this is going to compel him to become straight? Do you think this action communicates God's love to him?

As someone who has been through a similar violent experience, I am very aware of the possible effects of such trauma.
Fear that God doesn't love him
A stark sense of alone-ness in the world
Grief and depression at the loss of relationships and a sense of one's place in the world
Becoming angry at God, church & anyone who is religious
Greatly diminished self-worth and the subsequent risky behavior... drinking too much, using drugs, promiscuity...
Suicide

The only result of such an action is to cause harm. My prayer for him is that he will surround himself with people that will speak the truth about who he is and who God created him to be. My prayer is that the impact of the violence your university has inflicted on him will be lessened because of people taking a strong stand of love & support for him.

My prayer for you, as a part of this University, is that you would realize what a great sin has been committed against this child of God in the name of Jesus. My prayer is that you will not be silent in the face of spiritual violence. My prayer is that you will be led by the love of God in spite of your uncertainties and questions about sexuality.

My prayer is for reconciliation. Please join me in this prayer.

Sincerely,

Nate Black
www.nateblack.us

mailto:ncox@wlextv.com

[zacxdreyer09]

He's not out of town... just not answering phone calls about this issue... you want to talk to him then I would suggest not telling the secretary on why you are calling. hehe!

[Mia14]

I'm impressed with how quickly the community is reacting to this horrible incident, but I wonder if we're going about this correctly.

Maybe it's not right to bombard the man's personal cell phone with angry calls. It's not that I'm not driven to action by what happened to Jason, but I wonder if such a personal intrusion goes along with the message of nonviolence that is central to Soulforce. I knwo I would certainly consider it violent if someone was to use my cell phone to contact me about issues I was trying to avoid. I know we need him to hear us, but I think the best way is through his secretary. I remember the webpage we have dedicated to not hating our adversaries (http://www.soulforce.org/article/679) and I think this is starting to drift into a bad territory. I think everyone's very passionate about Jason's impossibly unreasonable expulsion and maybe our judgement is being clouded by emotions.

Please, :pray: try to remember that this president is a person just like you and he's not evil or bad, just acting on behalf of misinformation. He doesn't deserve to be treated any worse than one would treat Jason - we merely need to help provide him with our information about homosexuality and help him to understand where we are coming from so that he might make a different decision.


To those who have not yet read our credo about adversaries, please use the highlighted link above or go to http://www.soulforce.org/article/679.

[Venari]

He was then handed a letter and read a section of the hand book that says, and I quote...

"Any student who engages in or promotes sexual behavior not consistant with Christian principles (including sex outside marriage and homosexuality) may be suspended or asked to leave the University of the Cumberlands."

Oh, and about that bit from the hand book, it was added this year! Jason was about to finish his sophmore year there... he had decided to to there before that was put into the handbook!

Kentucky Revised Statutes (http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/KRS/344-00/CHAPTER.HTM)

OK playing devils advocate here goes... (please dont flame me back)

Sadly Jason is technically in the wrong in this situation. First he did attend University of Cumberlands before they fully had a rule that a student could be dismissed. But the fact remains he entered into a same sex relationship after the rule was in place. Additionally from his online profile, Jason (http://www.myspace.com/runnienoz), and the profile of his boyfriend, Zac (http://www.myspace.com/zacdreyer), it is clear Jason willing and boldly broke the rules provided by the school. As such the school is completely in its right, I didn’t say was right, to dismiss Jason from the university.

I do not have my BAR license for KY but from spending this time to review the state laws and conferring with a friend who practices in KY sadly the school was completely in their legal right to dismiss Jason. I faced the same thing I worked for a Christian out-reach center and I had "not disclosed" for my sexuality but I had a blog post about struggling with the issue of homosexuality and that was enough to fire me. Sadly the law is stacked against GLBT people in cases like this... so any efforts in that direction will, most likely, prove fruitless.

What will be most useful it to be open to the merits Jason brought to the school and how his dismissal was, is not illegal, unethical by the school. That is if they based their decision on the content of the page and not investigating further.

As I said, I am only playing devils advocate here. Working for the same system that would make a decision like that and with a background in law that is how I know a response will be formulated, and legally I know its pretty "bullet proof."

But Jason and Zac I pray God will give you the courage and strength to stand for what is right and may His presence give you the peace you need when times are hard.

-Venari

[Venari]

Phone away my friends. Let your voices be heard.

I respectfully disagree as well. There is a line between "relentless Nonviolence" harassment. Frakly repedetly calling someone and leaving messages, or bulk e-mailing, gets pretty close and if not corsses that line.

Calling him once a week and leaving a message, or writing once a week, is understandable. But honestly one needs to be careful that your "non-viloence" becomes harassment. Also suck actions can be taken to a counter point of what your trying to acheve... as in the old line "I am being attacked by Satan so I must be doing that right thing."

-Venari

[NathanATX]

I respectfully disagree as well. There is a line between "relentless Nonviolence" harassment. Frakly repedetly calling someone and leaving messages, or bulk e-mailing, gets pretty close and if not corsses that line.

Calling him once a week and leaving a message, or writing once a week, is understandable. But honestly one needs to be careful that your "non-viloence" becomes harassment. Also suck actions can be taken to a counter point of what your trying to acheve... as in the old line "I am being attacked by Satan so I must be doing that right thing."

-Venari

I don't think anyone said to call him repetitively.

I called his office once and will probably call his cell phone once.

Bulk emailing is fantastic tool to use to get out information and it does help.

Last week, a friend of mine sent me an email. She was a student in a Houston High School. She told of a friend of hers that came in to class crying because he had just been suspended. He was out sick the day the immigration protests took place and the attendance clerk asked him if he was hispanic. She gave him an unexcused absence because he was hispanic he "was at the protest." And he was given a 3 day suspension.

I sent an email to: The principal, the Superintendent of the school district, the ACLU, the Society for the Advancemet of Mexican Americans and a local TV station.

Long story short, he was back in class the next day.

There may not be a clear legal avenue to help Jason Johnson with his situation at the University of the Cumberlands, but the court of public opinion is VERY powerful. Illuminating injustice is an important part of a non-violent response to injustice.

For someone who has experienced the trauma of discrimination and emotional/spiritual violence, you seem very concerned with the well-being of the perpetrator. We are not attacking a specific person, we are sending a strong message that their violent words and actions will be publicized in the hopes they will have a change of heart and take steps towards reconciliation.

[Joe Brummer]

Sorry to be a party pooper here, but are we really following the philosophy of nonviolence here?

Are we sending emails and phone calls just to complain?

Are we asking questions and gathering information?

Are we educating both sides on all the facts on the issue?

How do we go about trying to negotiate, before all of this direct action of calling and emailing?


History and nonviolence have taught us that if we don't follow all of the steps of nonviolence, you haven't made you adversary into an ally, you have only alienated him from the conflict and made a new enemy.

Do you really think these things will help the man see the truth or just frustrate him into not wanting to negotiate.

I have to disagree with Nathan, I usually agree with you, but yes, you are attacking this man.. Calling his cell phone, bombarding him with emails of complaints that do not offer solutions.

We have to ve more concerned with the well being of our adversary. That is the whole spirit of nonviolence. If you are more concerned about you and taking your agressions out on the person instead of the problem, you are not being nonviolent. In fact, you are activily participating in violence.

Nonviolence is a new way of thinking, it is a new way of seeing conflict and a new way of seeing those to whom we have conflicts. In our old way of thinking our CONCERNS are about us and our AGRESSIONS are towards the person. We see only how the problems affect “us”. We are not concerned about the person, our adversary. We are conerned about us. We see the person as the problem, we are blind to the real problem, that which lies underneath causing the conditions with which we disagree.

When we try to fight violence with violence it only creates more violence. All of our energies go at the person doing what we call evil never adressing the real issues that caused anyone to act the way they do. If someone calls us a name, and we respond by calling them names, they now want to respond with more names. Where does that end? If we were to respond to what the person has done (call us names) and not them, we are addressing the real issue.

With Nonviolence our CONCERNS and AGRESSIONS become reversed. Instead of being concerned about the problem, we are concerned about the person. Instead of our AGRESSION being directed at the person, they are directed at the problem. It is a way of reaching out to others to solve conflict without destroying each other. Nonviolence requires us to love. Nonviolence requires us to direct our anger at the problem not the person.

I refer you to the third principle of nonviolence as explained by MLK:

This method is that the attack is directed against forces of evil rather than against persons who are caught in those forces. It is evil we are seeking to defeat, not the persons victimized by evil. Those of us who struggle against racial injustice must come to see that the basic tension is not between races. As I like to say to the people in Montgomery, Alabama: “The tension in this city is not between white people and Negro people. The tension is at bottom between justice and injustice, between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. And if there is a victory it will be a victory not merely for 50,000 Negroes, but a victory for justice and the forces of light. We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may happen to be unjust.”

[Joe Brummer]

I respectfully disagree. Strongly in fact.

You rightly point out that one should not confuse the message with the motivation. But I do not see why SoulForce's message should be modulated for his personal comfort. If personal comfort was the deciding factor there would be no 'direct action.'

Change is never easy or, for that matter, pleasant.

And let's be practical here: the guy is going to shut off his phone at some point (if he hasn't already), but in that small window of opportunity- for him to get the message- he will.

Phone away my friends. Let your voices be heard.


Think about this, he will sut off his phone and stop listening, what has been acomplished? Have you made your enemy an ally?


Sadly, I question whether Soulforce is doing enough to teach it's members the true meaning of nonviolence.

[pnggrad79]

Maybe I need to be educated on this nonviolence thing- In my mind, nonviolence means not using physical means to protest an injustice. What it is however, is using other means to protest an injustice. When I saw the movie Gandhi-there was plenty of overt displays of protest-his hunger strikes, the march to the ocean to protest the salt tax, etc. When I saw the pictures of the march to Selma and the diner sit-ins and the children being escorted into Little Rock High School-they were all overt protests to a blatant injustice. I wouldn't deem phone calls violent by nature. They may be irritating and overbearing, they may invade much needed privacy, but violent? If Jason doesn't want phone calls and just needs time to chill and get his head together, then we need to allow him that space. He will reach out when he is ready. He has just been through a major ordeal with much backlash to come. When need to be in prayer for him, and support him. :pray:

[Joe Brummer]

There is physical violence, but also non-physical violence. Anything we do that diverts our concerns at the problem, and not the well-being of our adversary may be violence.

Phone calls can be violent, if your intent is to annoy your adversary into change. That is violence. We need to make change through nonviolence means. Letters are good, phone call are good if done in the right time and the right manner.

First we need to gather more information, educate, and then "self purify" to make sure our direct actions are nonviolent.

[NathanATX]

Sorry to be a party pooper here, but are we really following the philosophy of nonviolence here?

Are we sending emails and phone calls just to complain?

Are we asking questions and gathering information?

Are we educating both sides on all the facts on the issue?

How do we go about trying to negotiate, before all of this direct action of calling and emailing?


History and nonviolence have taught us that if we don't follow all of the steps of nonviolence, you haven't made you adversary into an ally, you have only alienated him from the conflict and made a new enemy.

Do you really think these things will help the man see the truth or just frustrate him into not wanting to negotiate.

I have to disagree with Nathan, I usually agree with you, but yes, you are attacking this man.. Calling his cell phone, bombarding him with emails of complaints that do not offer solutions.

We have to ve more concerned with the well being of our adversary. That is the whole spirit of nonviolence. If you are more concerned about you and taking your agressions out on the person instead of the problem, you are not being nonviolent. In fact, you are activily participating in violence.

Nonviolence is a new way of thinking, it is a new way of seeing conflict and a new way of seeing those to whom we have conflicts. In our old way of thinking our CONCERNS are about us and our AGRESSIONS are towards the person. We see only how the problems affect “us”. We are not concerned about the person, our adversary. We are conerned about us. We see the person as the problem, we are blind to the real problem, that which lies underneath causing the conditions with which we disagree.

When we try to fight violence with violence it only creates more violence. All of our energies go at the person doing what we call evil never adressing the real issues that caused anyone to act the way they do. If someone calls us a name, and we respond by calling them names, they now want to respond with more names. Where does that end? If we were to respond to what the person has done (call us names) and not them, we are addressing the real issue.

With Nonviolence our CONCERNS and AGRESSIONS become reversed. Instead of being concerned about the problem, we are concerned about the person. Instead of our AGRESSION being directed at the person, they are directed at the problem. It is a way of reaching out to others to solve conflict without destroying each other. Nonviolence requires us to love. Nonviolence requires us to direct our anger at the problem not the person.

I refer you to the third principle of nonviolence as explained by MLK:

This method is that the attack is directed against forces of evil rather than against persons who are caught in those forces. It is evil we are seeking to defeat, not the persons victimized by evil. Those of us who struggle against racial injustice must come to see that the basic tension is not between races. As I like to say to the people in Montgomery, Alabama: “The tension in this city is not between white people and Negro people. The tension is at bottom between justice and injustice, between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. And if there is a victory it will be a victory not merely for 50,000 Negroes, but a victory for justice and the forces of light. We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may happen to be unjust.”

I can see that didn't do a very good job of offering a solution in my email. Any suggestions? I could have also stated that my understanding of the situation was not from personal experience and invite him to clarify what actually happened.

I'm not bombarding him with emails or calls. One email to him... and to everyone at the university I could locate an address for. One email for local media and churches. I think by sending the email to everyone in the region, it invites people to confront injustice... not a specific person.

My personal intention is to open a dialogue with him or any of the recipients of the email. I called him because I wanted to talk to him.

I'm relatively new, as are most of us, to learning and practicing non-violence... so I realize I have much to learn.

[Joe Brummer]

I truly believe the best hope gays and lesbians have to win rights and stop the violence against us is nonviolence. I believe the only hope for the world these days with all the video games and movies teaching our kids violence as the way to solve their conflicts, is nonviolence.

Nathan, I would so urge you and others to read the 17 steps journey, not just once, but again, and again. Don't just apply it to gay rights, apply it to everday life. Nonviolence isn't just about social change in large settings it is about building the "Beloved Community".

I have tons of resources on my website about nonviolence.
You could also visit the King Center where you can do an online course in nonviolence for free.

Being completely nonviolent is much to strive for, and may never happen for most of us. Even Gandhi and King never claimed they could be completely nonviolent. THe world has not gotten to this place by completely evil people and it will not be save by completely good people. Only people.

[NathanATX]

I truly believe the best hope gays and lesbians have to win rights and stop the violence against us is nonviolence. I believe the only hope for the world these days with all the video games and movies teaching our kids violence as the way to solve their conflicts, is nonviolence.

Nathan, I would so urge you and others to read the 17 steps journey, not just once, but again, and again. Don't just apply it to gay rights, apply it to everday life. Nonviolence isn't just about social change in large settings it is about building the "Beloved Community".

I have tons of resources on my website about nonviolence.
You could also visit the King Center where you can do an online course in nonviolence for free.

Being completely nonviolent is much to strive for, and may never happen for most of us. Even Gandhi and King never claimed they could be completely nonviolent. THe world has not gotten to this place by completely evil people and it will not be save by completely good people. Only people.

I have gone through most of the soulforce and the King center info.... and plan to keep going through it. I definitely agree with you that the values of compassion and non-violence are absolutely key to creating a healthy & loving community.

Other than making the changes we mentioned...

Presenting information and asking for clarification
Providing some alternatives to the behavior

Is there anything specifically out of line with non-violent principles?

I think these things happen because all too often the perpetrators of the violence are shielded from the impact of their words and actions.

For example: I spoke about this on Saturday at a college student glbt conference. The session was titled "Loving those who persecute you" and was intended to give the "how to" answers for dealing with homophobic abuse & discrimination. Lucy Wilkes, the leader of the local PFLAG, shared a situation that she didn't know how to handle.

She has four children, three of whom are gay. Lucy's straight son's wife disinvited Lucy's lesbian daughter's partner to their son's one year birthday party. (confused? :confused: )

Lucy was heartbroken and told her daughter-in-law that she understood her feelings, but that she felt it wasn't right and wouldn't support her decision. She said the rest of the family was not coming to the birthday party if one member was not invited.

Lucy thinks she did the right thing, but she has tremendous guilt and is feeling responsible for all the subsequent drama.

My point to her was that compassion is not always comfortable. I shared some buddhist teaching about understanding "the other" as a key to compassion. Compassion helps us to let go of the hurt and anger, but it does not mean we need to become a doormat.

Suffering is sometimes a part of a non-violent response, but only if it supports the cause of non-violence and isn't suffering for suffering's sake.

Within this university and the Southern Baptist world, I believe they are all pretty much shielded from the impact of their actions. They can destroy a gay person and not have to see the aftermath because they kick him out of their community and most likely shun his family as well.

I believe they need to see the aftermath of their actions. They need to know the pain & hurt they have caused. They need to know that others are becoming aware of the violence they have caused.

Not as a way of punishing or judging them, but to help them truly see "the other" and to be able to honestly evaluate their actions.

But like I said... I know I still have much to learn. Maybe I'm still way off base.

[Joe Brummer]

I have gone through most of the soulforce and the King center info.... and plan to keep going through it. I definitely agree with you that the values of compassion and non-violence are absolutely key to creating a healthy & loving community.

Other than making the changes we mentioned...

Presenting information and asking for clarification
Providing some alternatives to the behavior

Is there anything specifically out of line with non-violent principles?

As far as this one is concerned maybe not. I am just sadden at some of the responses in this thread, not necessarily yours, but some. I was deeply concerned about the notion that we should not be worried about "the perpatrators well being" since that type of thinking is in direct opposition what Soulforce claims to promote and what I truly believe.


I think these things happen because all too often the perpetrators of the violence are shielded from the impact of their words and actions.


You are quite right about this, but that is where the step of educating parties on all sides of the conflict. Educating people doesn't always mean direct action. No direct action should take place until all of the facts of been collected and all parties have been educated on those facts. In this case I haven't really heard to colleges reponse or their facts. Without all the facts how can we educate people and show them anything.

For example: I spoke about this on Saturday at a college student glbt conference. The session was titled "Loving those who persecute you" and was intended to give the "how to" answers for dealing with homophobic abuse & discrimination. Lucy Wilkes, the leader of the local PFLAG, shared a situation that she didn't know how to handle.

She has four children, three of whom are gay. Lucy's straight son's wife disinvited Lucy's lesbian daughter's partner to their son's one year birthday party. (confused? :confused: )

Lucy was heartbroken and told her daughter-in-law that she understood her feelings, but that she felt it wasn't right and wouldn't support her decision. She said the rest of the family was not coming to the birthday party if one member was not invited.
Now here is where I will ask questions and gather information. Did Lucy sit down and gather all the info about why the partner wasn't invited? What was the reasons, was it to show disapproval or was their a fight. WHat are the facts and could they have been worked out in a negotiation? Maybe some agreement could have been reached where all parties are in a win-win situation. I don't have all the facts so I am only pointing out what I can based on what I know of it.

Lucy thinks she did the right thing, but she has tremendous guilt and is feeling responsible for all the subsequent drama.

My point to her was that compassion is not always comfortable. I shared some buddhist teaching about understanding "the other" as a key to compassion. Compassion helps us to let go of the hurt and anger, but it does not mean we need to become a doormat.

Suffering is sometimes a part of a non-violent response, but only if it supports the cause of non-violence and isn't suffering for suffering's sake.

I agree suffering is sometimes needed, but in a nonviolent resolution suffering should not come with guilt or shame. It should come with a sense of pride for standing up to injustice. Of course this is just my opinions and as you can see I sometimes have too many of those.

Within this university and the Southern Baptist world, I believe they are all pretty much shielded from the impact of their actions. They can destroy a gay person and not have to see the aftermath because they kick him out of their community and most likely shun his family as well.

I believe they need to see the aftermath of their actions. They need to know the pain & hurt they have caused. They need to know that others are becoming aware of the violence they have caused.

I 100% agree with you, but we always need to keep in mind this goes back to education on the facts. It is clear these Universities do not have the facts on the aftermath of their actions. Educating them takes time, but is neccessary to get them to the table to negotiate. We cannot force other to the table, we want them to come to the table willing. Direct actions must be used only to create tension and pressure to make the other party "want" to come to the table. We must ask ourselves: Does our direct action make the other party "want" to come to the table and solve the problem or is it just pissing them off. In the Birmingham boycotts and lunch counter sit ins, the business owners wanting to end the boycotts. They wanted to be at the table and find a win-win end to the conflicts. That must be the end result of out efforts with the universities. We need to have them "want" to be at the table, not force them to the table.

Not as a way of punishing or judging them, but to help them truly see "the other" and to be able to honestly evaluate their actions.

But like I said... I know I still have much to learn. Maybe I'm still way off base.

Nathan, we all have much to learn. I am still learning everyday as I try to make nonviolence a part of my every day life.

[Zerbie]

Interesting.

I will not and would not call the president's personal cell phone. I would call his office phone. Why? The decision we are complaining about was a business/professional decision. We are addressing him in his capacity as university president, not as (I forget his name), So n So in his personal life.

While one phone call might sound like it is not intrusive, have you counted how many active Soulforce members are listed on this site? Close to 300. IF each of us placed one call to his cell phone for a minute or two, that would be 300 phone calls. If every caller left a 2 minute message that would be 600 minutes of call time. And 300 calls to a personal phone number is way over the top. If it were me getting those calls, I would be furious at you for calling before even hearing a single word you say.

Why the heck not direct all calls through the Secretary? Say not a single calls get sthru to the prez. Secretary still says, "You received 300 phone calls today complaining about Jason's expulsion from school." Secretary can't get any other work done b/c of the volume of phone calls, office slows down for everything the prez wants done. He gets the message that there is significant dissent that way. Not through intrusion into his personal life.

I know I've just disagreed with several of you who I love to pieces. Hugs atcha. :love:

[NathanATX]

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/state/14313621.htm Vote in the poll!

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/14313631.htm

[Jamie McDaniel]

Dean's List Student Asked To Leave College After He Reveals He's Gay (http://www.lex18.com/Global/story.asp?S=4742407)
Quote from University president: "There are places students with predispositions can go such as San Francisco and the left coast..."

Reaction grows to gay student's expulsion; Other Cumberlands Students Express Hurt, Confusion (http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/state/14313621.htm)

[Joe Brummer]

Now that some more info has been gathered from the University. It would be a good time to come up with a direct action that involves the press. I would suggest that people flood their local papers with letters about this, as well as the local TV. The school at this point should see the "left coast" reaction to this event. It would also helped if it made more national headlines. Here in New England this hasn't made the news yet. It could.

Perhaps a march from the school to the state capital building to ask the legislature to stop the school's state aid would also be good. It appears their is support enough to make that kind of big. It would be good to notify the school first and give them a chance to negotiate, but if they refuse, I would suggest marching in protest. Then present the facts to the legislature and ask for action from them.

[themattperry]

The article below has little to do with the case at hand, but it does give a good amount of interesting background regarding the academic environment at Cumberland. President James H Taylor, it turns out, has been president of the University since 1980 -- an incredible tenure for a college president. The article, entitled investigates academic freedom at the College by examining the case of two different faculty members who were dismissed. I just thought it might be good background material on the institution, its environment, and its president.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3860/is_200503/ai_n13635311

[zacxdreyer09]

I would personally like to thank everyone for their support and for their opinions and ideas. The story is about to break national news very soon! If not tonight!

Thank you all for your support!

Much love,
Zac

[trulyme212]

Its really great to see all this news coverage.....

I personally was intrigued by the comment made from one of the senators about funding.

He stated that it the state of KY was to continue funding schools such as Cumberland it would be as if the state was only aiding heterosexuals. I never thought about that.

Here's the direct quote.

"If the University of the Cumberlands does not change its policies and practices, we will have a state benefit that is only available to heterosexuals," Scorsone said.

Keep up the good work everyone!!

[Daniel]

Think about this, he will sut off his phone and stop listening, what has been acomplished? Have you made your enemy an ally?


Sadly, I question whether Soulforce is doing enough to teach it's members the true meaning of nonviolence.

I have decided to retract my two statements made on this thread. I do not claim to know the 'true meaning' of nonviolence. but have been made keenly aware of when it is not in the best interests of everyone to engage in a point of discussion which detracts from the discussion.

[NathanATX]

I have decided to retract my two statements made on this thread. I do not claim to know the 'true meaning' of nonviolence. but have been made keenly aware of when it is not in the best interests of everyone to engage in a point of discussion which detracts from the discussion.

I don't know that I would retract anything... but maybe direct the conversation to a new message topic.

I am really impressed that so many people here are drawn to the principles of non-violence and want to incorporate them into their lives.

We shouldn't be getting down on each other for "not doing things right." If you feel you have insight into how the principles & steps of non-violence could be expressed in our words and actions with more eloquence & efficiency, please share your thoughts... in a loving and constructive way! And realize that people may not agree with you... and be "ok" with that!

I'm personally more committed to growing and learning than I am to staying in my "comfort zone." This might mean I will need to change and adapt as I move along this journey with you all. This might mean that I will need to encourage you to change and adapt as well.

We all have different strengths...

Incredible Bible knowledge
Limitless compassion
Hilarious sense of humor
Courage and willingness to speak out
Ability to listen and understand what people are saying
The gift of prayer
The ability to write and speak eloquently
Tenacity
Humility
Understanding & forgiving people who wrong us


Let's rely on each other to sharpen our strengths and improve our weaknesses... "as iron sharpens iron."

love you all,
Nate

[Joe Brummer]

I do apologize if I get too riled up about nonviolence. I realize I can tend to do that. I hope it has not offended anyone!

I would be happy to share anything I know about the civil rights movement and nonviolence with anyone who wants to know about it. I have been studying it religiously lately and could offer much insight to those who would like to have it.

I do feel that it would be good if Soulforce could add more emphasis on teaching nonviolence. The 17 Step Journey is a great tool for learning nonviolence, but I don't know that people know to read it. Maybe Jaime could add a link to the site that says "nonviolence self-study" or something so our letters to editors, our direct actions and phone call campaigns fall in line with the mission of Soulforce.

Gays and lesbians have tried many things over the years to win our rights. We are constantly told that the world isn't ready for us to have our rights. We are demonize at every chance the conservatives get, all do to misinformation. Nonviolence has worked a dozen times over for oppressed groups. I truly believe it is the only hope for us.

[NathanATX]

I do feel that it would be good if Soulforce could add more emphasis on teaching nonviolence. The 17 Step Journey is a great tool for learning nonviolence, but I don't know that people know to read it. Maybe Jaime could add a link to the site that says "nonviolence self-study" or something so our letters to editors, our direct actions and phone call campaigns fall in line with the mission of Soulforce.


A more definite teaching and training program would be incredible!

... maybe even coaches & mentors....

[tdogg]

Well said Nate!!! :agree:

[NathanATX]

http://www.abpnews.com/944.article

[Dash]

With the Equality Ride underway, what a timely opportunity to address another case of spiritual oppression in Christian schools! There's no question that the little mustard seeds of hatred planted in society by religious zeal have grown into great canopies of evil. The insistance that homosexuality is evil and the ensuing religious war against us results in beatings, bullets, and bashings. Gays are knifed, whipped, dragged behind trucks, tied up, tortured and left to die by people who sincerely believe that God hates us.

In the context of what our martyred transexual, bisexual, lesbian and gay family members have gone through I would urge us all to keep in mind that we are not the perpetrators of violence. While phone calls can be annoying, insistant attempts to communicate might anger...there is no comparison between the violence done to us, and the protests that that we raise. If we cry out against the vigorous attacks made against us, I see no reason to add shame to our pain. We give our oppressors so much power. Let us not add to it embarassment for making our voices heard

Our history is not one of violence. Creating concept of the "militant gay activist" is a remarkably effective tactic of those who hate us, but it is untrue. What is true, however is the long bloody history of the Church against many groups of people who looked, lived, or worshipped differently. We are the victims of violence...nothing we have done in our protests is in any way violent. I thank all of you for the work you are doing, and I urge you to continue making your voices heard.

[Joe Brummer]

Dash,
I wish I could agree, but I don't. We have been violent to our oppressors. Even if just in our words. It is important for us to keep in check. To point out to each other how we can better this movement.

Having 300 people calls this man's cell phone is beyond annoying, it is violence. We can never retaliate in anyway. Even in our speech and words, and especially in our actions.

Comparison are no excuse. No matter what they do to us or have done, we must never retaliate in anyway. That is the whole point of nonviolence.

[Dash]

I must admit...humbly...I'm not sure that your perspective on telephone calls produces anything but blankness in my imagination. I can't concieve that an electronic signal from one device to another is violent...perhaps if we were advocating some violent act upon someone...but I know the love that grows here is incapable of that.:o

[Joe Brummer]

Dash,
Imagine you recieved 300 angry callers on your cell phone telling you that your beliefs and actions are wrong. How would you feel? Would you consider those people calling your ally's?

The problem with the calls is that in will not turn an adversary into an ally which is the goal of nonviolence.

[dewdrop_world]

By the same token, how can sound waves emanating from one person's mouth and entering another person's ear constitute violence?

How about when the one person is Fred Phelps and the other is a grieving war widow?

Violence is not inherent only in the action. It's as much in the intent if not more so.

James

[Joe Brummer]

If you look back at the civil rights movement lead by MLK, you will see that most of the direct actions were lead by the Student Nonviolence Coordinating Committee. If you listen to Dr. King's speeches, he talked of nonviolence and what it means constantly. Nonviolence was the heart of the movement. People were dedicated as much to learning nonviolence as they were the cause.

That is what I feel we as GLBT people need to be doing. Every move we make should be nonviolent. Before we can be assured of that, we must learn what violence really is and what nonviolence really is. I hope that as a community we can work towards that goal.

[jaltree]

http://www.abpnews.com/944.article

The key quote in my opinion is this:

“I would consider Jason a Christian because so many of his values are Christian…. He embodies everything a friend should be. A lot of people are suffering because he is not here.”

It seems that some of these religious 'leaders' have a hard time differentiating between worship of Christ, and worship of the Bible.

[Mia14]

I think I still agree that we should try to be civil to this college president and, as Zerbie said, call his office instead of his cell phone because this is a business-related incident for him. :agree: I'll admit that I was excited when I read his cell-phone number and wanted to call him myself, but then realized how attacked and violated I would feel if I were he.

Violence comes in many forms. If someone were to call you at work and complain that they saw you holding hands with your partner earlier that day, you'd feel violated and also annoyed that they called you at work about a personal issue.

I'm glad Joe Brummer could better explain what I was trying to say. :) I'm learning, but still not completely able to articulate all the specifics. Thanks, Joe.

[Joe Brummer]

Thank you Mia! I have learned from you tonight and i needed that!

[Jamie McDaniel]

Here is the front page of today's Lexington Herald-Leader.

Front Page of Herald-Leader (http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/herald-leader_4_12_06.pdf) (pdf)

Full story:
Gay policy could hurt pharmacy school plan. National standards prohibit discrimination (http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/14321980.htm)

[awediot]

Wow! Particularly the last paragraph... Justice may lie in the eye of the beholder, and thier bankbook... Caught the story on CNN as well but cannot find any link to the vid... Anyone?

Thanks for the update Jamie

[Dash]

We should of course be gentle and civil, yet our persistance, tenacity, and even audacity may be what wins the day.

Though the judge may have no intention of giving us justice, because we are after him every day...because we hound him...he may yet relent simply to stop our bothering him.

Though our friend may not get up in the night when we come to him in our need, because we continue knocking...he may let us in simply to stop our noise.

Though the world may not listen to our reasoned and eloquent arguments, because we are persistant and bold in demanding change, they may yet be moved.

I have spent almost all of my adult life in university communities. I have seen students rise up, and though the administrators have a plan and a purpose, because the students are so vocal and relentless, they do yield.

But if we are more concerned about the comfort of our sleeping friend than for our own greater needs in this dark night...he will never come to the door.

[Joe Brummer]

Nonviolence is much more than being civil and gentle. Leave all that to the others. Nonviolence is about love and nothing else.


Nonviolence is not about winning AGAINST your opponets, it is about winning over your opponett.

You wrote:
Though our friend may not get up in the night when we come to him in our need, because we continue knocking...he may let us in simply to stop our noise.

We want him to come to the door because he wants to, not because we made him. Nonviolence is not about making people do things, it is about making the WANT to do it because they have seen it is justice.

[Daniel]

Nonviolence is much more than being civil and gentle. Leave all that to the others. Nonviolence is about love and nothing else.


Nonviolence is not about winning AGAINST your opponets, it is about winning over your opponett.

You wrote:
Though our friend may not get up in the night when we come to him in our need, because we continue knocking...he may let us in simply to stop our noise.

We want him to come to the door because he wants to, not because we made him. Nonviolence is not about making people do things, it is about making the WANT to do it because they have seen it is justice.

Well. How's the water in here guys? I bailed out a few pages ago. Looks like things haven't changed much since I left.

Look Joe, how about at least seeing the sheer beauty of poetry in Nash's post?

You don't seem to be giving anyone the least amount of slack. How can anyone catch up with you when each time someone offers something their hand gets slapped for not being correct enough?

All 'bad dog' and no 'treats.'

[Dash]

Well, I don’t feel like my hand’s been slapped. :) :love:

I think the question of what makes violence is a good one to answer in this context. Right now, I’m in disagreement with the way it’s being defined. If annoying someone as a motivating purpose is spiritually violent, then much if not most of what we do is an illegitimate form of nonviolent protest. No one wants to be annoyed, and those opposed to us would like nothing more than for us to shut up, go away and otherwise be unseen. They are deeply annoyed by our very existence, to say nothing of our constant annoying cries of “How long” under the altar of God.

Since I don’t understand the definition that is being presented, I’m open to a clearer explication. For myself...I think of spiritual violence of which I’m sometimes guilty: calling names, belittling someone, or otherwise attempting to make their experience of less value. Other examples are banishment, denying place at a shared table, refusal to hear complaint...and many other things that can leave another soul broken, frightened, helpless, weak and outcast. This is exactly the spiritual violence that we face on a daily basis from many Church-taught people. It has been institutionalized to the point that it is almost inseparable from their society and individual personalities. In our frustration and anger we do sometimes yield to some of these tactics, but I don’t think that was happening here.

This thread originally generated an enthusiastic response from our young angels, and I saw nothing resembling the spiritual violence that I know. I was so proud to see them dashing off to comfort and defend their fallen family as well as confront the problem. But then it seemed they faltered...doubt clouded their hearts. While I admire their honest self-questioning, I genuinely feel their first spontaneous response was a good and right one.

I always want to avoid becoming what the opposing perspective wants us to be: silent, hidden, inactive...and yes, even straight or normal. I don’t want us to be changed into what “they’d like us to be.” It might make them more comfortable, but it won’t end the very real violence that is perpetrated against all who are not “normal.” For me, it seems the definition that makes our merely “annoying behavior” out to be “violent” effectively gags us, hides our light, and ties our hands.

[Zerbie]

Yes, Dash, this thread has gone off into theoretics.

Perhaps these last several posts should be spliced off into a new thread - Jamie?

There is wisdom in what you have to say - I loved reading your words from 2 or 3 posts ago! Beautifully said! I still agree with Joe about not calling the guy's personal phone, but it's absolutely correct that the means of persuasion used need to vary with time and circumstance.

There could be many situations in which crossing that "line" would be reasonable, and/or necessary.

But what we need to get back to seeing is- in this given situation, Jason's situation - what approach is more likely to *work*? Definitely the office phone thing. Now, perhaps if we didn't have that resource - if there were no office, no other way of reaching the prez, we would need to call the personal number to reach him. But there IS an alternative, it is appropriate, and it is the same exact medium (phone.) Why on earth take the risk of pissing off the person we want to persuade by crossing the barrier into his personal space? When we do not have to!!!!!

I don't want to follow a rulebook for ideology's sake. I don't want to be complacent. I don't want to be unnecessarily agitating. I want to do what is most likely to WORK. And that will vary with each situation.

[Joe Brummer]

Perhaps that is it true that I am too serious about nonviolence. I apologize if that comes off wrong.


Honestly I think calling and "annoying" this man falls into the catagory of bullying him. I find bullying an unfair play of power. Also, the end result isn't to inform or educate it is to annoy him. That is not a positive nonviolent outcome. Writing him letters or emails to educate and inform wouldbe good. It would also get the message across. If you want something more definte send him a telegram, even a singing telegram!

I believe and someone can correct me if I am wrong, but annoying someone isn't a way to win them over. Gaining their trust and having an educational dialog would gain their trust, lay out the facts and work towards a win-win reconciliation. Annoying them is just being a bully. It is saying "you will listen because I will make you listen" I don't believe that is nonviolence, I believe it is violence.

[Dash]

Singing telegrams! Perfect! hahah!! Now we really do need a new thread...one specifically for the composition of singing telegrams.

I really think it's a cool idea. :) Its humor fits into one of our unique powers as a community to transform bigotry into laughter. :lol:

[Joe Brummer]

and is completely nonviolent! annoys no one (unless the guy in the clown suit can't sing, then houston, we have a problem)

[Daniel]

Annoying them is just being a bully. It is saying "you will listen because I will make you listen" I don't believe that is nonviolence, I believe it is violence.

I remember standing with those who sat in the streets (I did not want to get arrested- my personal preference) during the 80's (remember ACT-UP?) who used quite- and I mean quite vocal means to get their message across. Their tactics very confrontational. We all benefited from those tactics. Major changes were made in drug policy- the same policy that is keeping people alive today.

Was that "bullying"? Most definitely.

Zerbie makes a most persuasive case when she asserts that 'the means of persuasion used need to vary with time and circumstance." I would add to that "place". The methods of ACT-UP were certainly of their time and place. Were they violent? No. Were they in your face loud? Yep. Is that violence? Good question. Could they have gotten things changed another, more 'peaceful' way? Having been there at the time, I would say no. It took what it took to get the job done. It was necessary for the time, the circumstance and the place.

I am willing to see that 'annoying' the president, in the case, is not the way to go. That said, a 'one size fits all' mentality does a disservice, not only to those who are eager to throw their backs into the work at hand, but to the work itself.

Trees bent in the wind. Shouldn't we?

There is so much passion here- it's amazing. It challenges and inspires me.

There is another thing that nags at me here. And that's the issue of anger (I'm deep into theoretics now Zerbie!) What is the role of anger in all this. Act-UP lived on anger. For a very long time. It got a lot done in it's anger. Does that make it bad? Invalid?

Jesus reportedly used those means in the temple, did he not? I mention this because I believe there is a strong reaction against anger in American life. Every politician on TV is grinning away even when they utter lies and hateful things. Why? Showing the face of anger is considered a no-no. Everything has to look right it seems. I wonder about that a lot. When is it alright to get pissed off and show it? Never?

I, for when , think this goes back to Zerbie's notion of time and circumstance. Perhaps the means have to fit the times.

[Joe Brummer]

You bring up a point that is well criticized in nonviolence. Anger! We get angry, it is human to be angry, it is healthy to be angry. Anger is at the heart of nonviolence. MLK was moved by his anger of injustice, Gandhi was moved by the anger of injustice and so was Christ. Christ is a great example. He saw a women about to be stoned for her sins. He was pissed. He stood up to the crowd and said let he without sin cast the first stone. He showed us what to do with our anger and that is to turn it into love.


We have two choices when we are angry.
1) lash out
2) respond in Agape love


When we turn that anger into love, we are taking our anger and agression and redirecting it at the problem and not the person. Nonviolence asks of us that we reserve our concerns and compassion for those we are angry with and turn those agressions and anger at the problem that caused the behavior. It forces us nd our opponet to deal with the underlying cause of the problem and not the people invovled in the problem.

I cannot claim to be a champion of this, but I try. It is easier to write about it than it is to do it. But it is essential that we try!

[Zerbie]

Yeah, that.

It is what you do with the anger that matters, not the anger itself.

The danger with expressing anger (in an angry way, confrontational, loud, frowning, whatever) is that anger gets denigrated as an irrational emotion. Everyone can look at the loud angry activist and point, "Look how angry those activists are." Subtext, look how irrational they are. Subtext, See, we can't take them seriously.

That is why it becomes ever more important that we mitigate the solely emotional expression of our anger whenever in the public eye. But the anger itself is not a bad thing. It is a good thing! It is the motivator - it is the signal that something is amiss, our rights, our selfhood, has been violated. We must use the anger, the only question is what kind of a tool we make the anger into.

I remember those ACT UP days as I was growing up then. It did seem like the only possible means at the time, as NO ONE was paying attention or caring, so it seemed. And lives were quite obviously and immediately at stake. When the stakes are lower, we can be choosier about the means we use.

[dewdrop_world]

Another part of the dynamic, which I sometimes overlook, is that if every one of the oppressed is "reasonable," then the people who disagree, whom we want to hear the message, perceive that reasonable-ness as an extreme position! Sometimes it takes more extreme means to wedge the door open... then, when the calm and rational spokesperson walks through the door, the oppressor is more likely to deal with her because her manner is easier to handle than the rabble.

To go back to the AIDS epidemic, if the only person talking about it says calmly but forcefuly, "It is not right to let so many gay men die," the response is, "Well, so what? They shouldn't be f***ing around like that."

When ACT-UP is staging die-ins outside and dumping ashes on the lawn of the White House, that same person is suddenly a beacon of good sense.

It goes back to intent. I can see little purpose in calling the University president's personal cell phone beyond, "I want to piss him off." It's no different from members of an anti-gay church in your neighborhood coming to your house and ringing your doorbell, one by one, every 10 minutes. They may claim to be expressing Christian love, but no one here would see it that way I'm sure.

But, a group of students could demonstrate outside his office with love in their hearts, and it could be a non-violent protest IF the intent is to stand up for a more loving principle, and not just to vilify the man who made the call.

It's tough. In activism, as in fashion, there's no one-size-fits-all answer.

hjh

[awediot]

To go back to the AIDS epidemic, if the only person talking about it says calmly but forcefuly, "It is not right to let so many gay men die," the response is, "Well, so what? They shouldn't be f***ing around like that."

Why did you feel the need to throw the "Well so what?" part in there? Do you believe that is the average response? Other than that, I agree, "They shouldn't be f**ing around like that." Nor should straights. The pain of promiscuity and infidelity is a complex issue transcending homosexuality. The common ground blind-sided here is the root of this confusion.

[Zerbie]

Well now, look at me answering instead of James! James, please do speak for yourself, but in response to awediot's WHY question: It was my perspective during the early years of the AIDS panic that yes, that absolutely was the average response. It would be wonderful to learn I was wrong - as a child, my perspective was limited largely to what my family had to say about it. But my mother, who I then looked up to as a model of justice and compassion, told me I should not cry if a homosexual died of AIDS because by having sex he had "asked for it." The mainstream TV media gave me the strong impression that no one should care about the epidemic because it only afflicted "bad people," and I was treated by my own parents like something was terribly wrong with me for even caring.

Value judgment of dying persons before the value of their *lives.*

So from my (then very limited) perspective, what James described certainly was the attitudinal environment.

This "they shouldn't be f*cking around" statement holds no relevance to the argument being made, which is that they do not/did not deserve to die from a potentially treatable though deadly serious illness, nor did they deserve to have their lives dismissed with a collective wave of America's hand as if they were mosquitos.

Geez, why am I ranting about this? Time to go turn on the television, aka the narc box.

[Jamie McDaniel]

There is tension in this thread and that's probably a good thing. There has always been tension surrounding the concept of nonviolence in Soulforce. From hearing older activists talk, it is a passionate converation that has been going on in many different nonviolent organizations for a long time. So I doubt we'll produce all the answers when this thread is finished. :)

I remember the Soulforce action in 2002 at the Southern Baptist Convention (http://www.soulforce.org/article/33). We had 38 people conduct an act of civil disobedience outside the convention and 12 people (6 male-female couples dressed in their Sunday best) inside the convention. When SBC president James Merritt delivered his speech, each couple would stand up and shout "God loves gay people", "My gay son is not sick!" etc. They would walk towards the pulpit in an attempt to reach Dr. Merritt and ask that they be allowed to address the convention (yeah, we thought big). They were arrested and then Dr. Merritt would continue and another couple would stand up, speak loudly, and walk towards the podium. Few were listening to Dr. Merritt because they were all looking around wondering where the next protesters would be.

This action caused lots of discussion four years ago. There is still a divide in Soulforce over whether it was the right thing to do. People I love and highly respect make good points on both sides.

The issue was that we had asked Dr. Merritt to do so little that year. We were willing to call off the entire demonstration if he would just come hear our testimonies for 30 minutes or if he would rebuke fellow Southern Baptist and Alabama Judge Roy Moore's horrible statement calling homosexuality "an inherent evil" and his adding that the state "carries the power of the sword ... to prohibit conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution."

Dr. Merritt would not hear our testimonies and he would not rebuke Judge Roy Moore. So the leadership team decided to escalate our direct action.

Let me add another difficult one! There is the question as to whether the destruction of property can ever be a part of nonviolence. After all, Jesus did turn over the merchant tables AND release the merchandise. If it hadn't been Jesus, would we be more likely to criticize this action? And what about Matthew chapter 23? Was that non-violence?

Oh so many things to discuss! When the war broke out, I attended my first anti-war rally. I had been to several Soulforce actions and I quickly noticed a difference. I had a relatively tame sign that read "Here is one Christian who is Sermon-on-the-Mount-Serious about Peace." The guy I was standing next to was waving a huge American flag upside down. This was on main street and drivers were cursing him. I thought one might jump out of their vehicle and start a fight. Some of the war protestors yelled "polite" insults back.

That event made my head spin and I suddenly realized that nonviolence is not so black and white. I also hate to admit that I have not attended an anti-war rally since then. And I have to wonder if my desire for a certain level of "purity" in nonviolent action has actually contributed to the problem of my country still being in Iraq.

These are difficult questions, indeed.

[Zerbie]

Oh so many things to discuss! When the war broke out, I attended my first anti-war rally. I had been to several Soulforce actions and I quickly noticed a difference. I had a relatively tame sign that read "Here is one Christian who is Sermon-on-the-Mount-Serious about Peace." The guy I was standing next to was waving a huge American flag upside down. This was on main street and drivers were cursing him. I thought one might jump out of their vehicle and start a fight. Some of the war protestors yelled "polite" insults back.

That event made my head spin and I suddenly realized that nonviolence is not so black and white. I also hate to admit that I have not attended an anti-war rally since then. And I have to wonder if my desire for a certain level of "purity" in nonviolent action has actually contributed to the problem of my country still being in Iraq.

These are difficult questions, indeed.


Jamie, I know you don't place responsibility on yourself personally for the war - do you mean that statement collectively? IE: I didn't engage as much as I could have because I was uncomfortable with fellow activists/tactics (whatever), and maybe others stayed home for the same reason? Because I suspect there is a reticence in our society nowadays to engage in political actions, rallies, demonstrations. Like that stuff is an artifact of the 60s that does not belong today.

I DO know what you're talking about as far as not involving yourself anymore, largely because of that incident. I have visited activist groups once or twice and then left for similar reasons. I do not easily associate with groups. I know this will come as a huge shock to fellow forumites, but I am opinionated :eek: :lol: - and tend to be an individualist first and foremost. I will occasionally identify with a group if and only if its collective character is something I am willing to be associated with, and even then, involvement is usually temporary. I am not willing to stand in seeming support next to a guy who is doing something that I deem unnecessarily disrespectful and potentially counter-productive.

We each have to decide for ourselves what we are willing to associate with. If a group you have been supporting begins to move in a direction where you cannot or will not follow, it is time to re-examine whether that is the place for you. Sounds like the anti-war group was not the group for you, Jamie. Obviously, this one seems to fit. If you are clearly made for something then that is where you should be. Nice ta seeya home. :love:

[Daniel]

There is tension in this thread and that's probably a good thing.

This action caused lots of discussion four years ago. There is still a divide in Soulforce over whether it was the right thing to do. People I love and highly respect make good points on both sides.

Jamie- about the action you relate. Not having been there, can you elaborate on this a bit more? What I'm getting at is this: what was the nature of the debate? What made for the divide you refer to? This seems to be much in the order of a koan.

ko·an (k?'än') n. A puzzling, often paradoxical statement or story, used in Zen Buddhism as an aid to meditation and a means of gaining spiritual awakening.

[Jamie McDaniel]

When I read the small article last Saturday, I was afraid this story was going to get sidelined in the media. I'm very pleased to see that is not the case. It's on the front page again today! And yesterday there was a strong editorial calling for the Governor to veto the $11 million in state funds that was being given to the Baptist school.

Front Page of Herald-Leader (http://www.soulforce.org/pdf/herald-leader_4_14_06.pdf) (pdf)

Full story:
Gay and Christian: Expelled Cumberlands Student (http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/14340025.htm)

Yesterday's Editorial
Attacks on fairness, Veto funds for Cumberlands' pharmacy school (http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/editorial/14330867.htm)

[Jamie McDaniel]

This is a blended thread and I looked at separating it by creating a new one. However, there is more than one thread regarding nonviolence at the moment and it is almost certain that future threads, especially those dealing with a specific incident or event, will generate more conversation around the concept of nonviolence.

Perhaps I could create a thread called "The Ongoing Discussion Surrounding Nonviolence" and make it a sticky (a thread that stays at the top regardless of when the last post was made.) Then when a conversation in another thread grows to a certain level, members might consider taking it there. Or we could continue to let those conversations intermingle. Thoughts? (adding another discussion to this thread. :lol: )

Jamie, I know you don't place responsibility on yourself personally for the war - do you mean that statement collectively? IE: I didn't engage as much as I could have because I was uncomfortable with fellow activists/tactics (whatever), and maybe others stayed home for the same reason?
Yes, collectively. Any post of mine made after midnight often needs clarification the next day. However, when making the statement my own, I would change the phrase "could have" to "should have." But then that might again throw the balance regarding personal responsibility.


Jamie- about the action you relate. Not having been there, can you elaborate on this a bit more?
2002 was the third year Soulforce demonstrated at the Southern Baptist Convention. We had over 200 people and Gandhi's grandson led the nonviolence training.

The leaders in the Southern Baptist convention are hardcore anti-gay. The denomination had always been conservative, but they took a sharp turn to the right in 1979 when fundamentalists gained power and the moderate minority left.

Soulforce was concerned that we were just being "too polite" by vigiling and asking the messengers to look at our materials. By the third year, too many of our conversations were going the route of "well, we will just have to agree to disagree." The problem with that, of course, is that the oppressor remains the oppressor and the oppressed remains oppressed. Injustice is never threatened by people who merely disagree with the injustice. There has to be some action taken.

So there was a concern that though our vigils were indeed action, that we weren't properly conveying the seriousness and urgency of our message that Southern Baptist anti-gay teachings kill GLBT people. Mel White knew the funerals he had preached of gays that had committed suicide, he knew all the letters of anguish he had received from readers of Stranger at the Gate, and he saw that the people who were killing gays so often quoted anti-gay religious teachings.

So there was a strong feeling that year that we weren't doing enough to stop the suffering. Add that to Judge Roy Moore's less-than-veiled reference to execution as a possible solution to the "inherent evil" of homosexuality and you had a very interesting moment for Soulforce.

The debate centered around Soulforce going inside the convention with the intent of taking our message to the floor of the SBC's annual meeting. These twelve volunteers dressed up to "fit in" with Southern Baptists and went in as male-female pairs. They attended several hours until Dr. Merrit gave his address. Then every two minutes, one of the couples would stand up in the crowd and begin proclaiming "God loves gay people!" or something very similiar. The activists were jailed for 10 hours and booked on a felony charge. The felony charge was later dropped. Those who were arrested on the outside spent 4 hours in jail and had to pay a $250 fine. (Remember, only those who choose to be arrested participate in the civil disobedience if there is one. Not wanting to scare would-be activists off with this story.)

Those who felt this was not the best thing for Soulforce to do made a case that fear was at the heart of Southern Baptist beliefs on homosexuals and that our going inside elevated that fear and was therefore counterproductive and not in step with methods of nonviolence.

[Zerbie]

Interesting question Jamie, about the action. We may never know if it was "right." Logic on both sides.

I can't believe - a felony charge? What on earth was the felony? It sounds like a disorderly conduct to me, but I thought that was a misdemeanor. Er, trespassing??? Totally confused and boggled.

Jamie - to answer your question about intermingling and drifting threads, let's leave it alone. Things progress organically, so let them. I thought perhaps you might want to splice off into a new thread because you've done so before to keep conversations more orderly and on topic. But there is a spontaneity and authenticity to immediate responses like these that can't be recreated if we all detour around to post in the 'correct' place. So that's my vote. :)

[Joe Brummer]

I think this thread has been both educational and thought provoking for all sides, I hope that it continues. I do also think having a "Sticky" thread about nonviolence would give not only us a place to talk and learn about nonviolence but it would give our vistiors a place to see what we are about.

[Daniel]

Those who felt this was not the best thing for Soulforce to do made a case that fear was at the heart of Southern Baptist beliefs on homosexuals and that our going inside elevated that fear and was therefore counterproductive and not in step with methods of nonviolence.

Jamie- thanks for relating the circumstances of the SBC action. Wow. Sounds like what took place was very Act-Uppity. Ain't that interesting? I see similarities in both that action and the telephone matter. Both have, if I can put it this way, a fear factor.

If the issue is one of fear- and not wanting to engender fear, then, of course, this makes sense to me. I probably would have been one of those who would have argued for it! I sense the same dynamic at work here with the presiden't phone matter. Both are dynamically instrusive. And electricfying.

What I am learning perhaps from this discussion it that the 'ground' one walks on in these matters is as important as the issue before one. And I can see why JoeB is so intent on matters of 'technique'. Working in the arts, I can appreciate that.

Though something about this story and the phone thing still sticks with me and made me think of this: there is nothing more terrifying than being offered something which will demand that you give up something else.

Take away a kids bottle and you gotta put something back in its mouth. How to do that without them screaming their head off, is, perhaps, the trick. You gotta be quick.

Those SBC'er are getting a lot of juice out of their stuff. I don't think they wanna give it up yet. They're hanging on with both hands. How to get them to? That's my koan.

I don't know. What do you do with a kid?

Distraction?

[awediot]

It seems there are so many extenuating circumstances, we can at best hope calmer heads prevail as the challenges shift. Guess that is why nonviolence is practiced when its not needed... A couple thoughts...

I don't know. What do you do with a kid?
...depends on if its just drowning out the TV or about to hit it's sister with a sharp toy...

If the issue is one of fear- and not wanting to engender fear,

... if it's gonna clobber it's sister again, put the fear of God into it. (I know, topic unto itself, but it'll save his sister in the mean time) Fear is a tool we loathe to use, but it is called for at times.

there is nothing more terrifying than being offered something which will demand that you give up something else.
...unless it is better, and worth it.

If it is the world at large we want to make better, we share alot of moral belief and outrage with our adversaries. Big, genuine agreements as to the evils of promiscuity and cheating, shared pain in seeing our kids numbed by entertaining violence, the change in the political atmosphere, corporate power and coruption and the scourge of addiction et al.... Two words: COMMON GROUND. It is not a tactic or contrivance or distraction and we'll likely find they are about as normal as they are surprised to find us. Bypass thier misguided bigotry for the moment as they bypass your misguided urges and agree to disagree, knowing the topic will arise again, but now between 'friends'.

If it is our gay world set for improvement, it does seem the extent one uses self-defense hinges on the damage being done, and whether we just want the action stopped reguardless, Now!, or we have time to win hearts and minds to our side...

[NathanATX]

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/local/14340025.htm

The young man's story WITH audio clips...

[Dash]

They confronted him last week with a printout of the site, an order to leave the school and failing grades for a semester that probably would have ended with honors.

The university did not return calls seeking comment yesterday.


Not content, of course, to simply banish him from their community...they must also put a black mark on his academic record! They want to make sure the gays know that not only are they not welcome in their world...If they can, they'll hurt 'em in the secular world too.:mad:

[Zerbie]

I missed that about the failing grades, the first time I looked.

*they changed his grades???* If so, I think that can wrong can be righted - how would they get away with that? Is it part of policy? If a straight A student violates the "homosexual conduct" rule (or whatever they call their policy), the university is permitted to alter his grades??? I doubt it.

That action needs to be challenged.

[keltic63]

I missed that about the failing grades, the first time I looked.

*they changed his grades???* If so, I think that can wrong can be righted - how would they get away with that? Is it part of policy? If a straight A student violates the "homosexual conduct" rule (or whatever they call their policy), the university is permitted to alter his grades??? I doubt it.

That action needs to be challenged.

I'm only guessing here, but from my short stint at teaching at the college level, the grades are not final until turned in at the end of the semester. So while the student may have had passing grades up to the point of his expulsion, the final grade could indeed be a failing grade because he did not complete the courses. So, nothing has been altered, it's more that he didn't complete the requirements for the classes.

[Zerbie]

So they don't reflect a withdrawal? Is that part of the punishment for violating policy, that you get Fs for not completing the coursework you are not permitted to complete?! :mad:

I hope Jason is at least looking into the possibility of his grades reflecting a course withdrawal.

[keltic63]

So they don't reflect a withdrawal? Is that part of the punishment for violating policy, that you get Fs for not completing the coursework you are not permitted to complete?! :mad:


there you go. hey! that's a lot like telling gay people they can't get married, then criticizing them for having sex outside of marriage! ;)

[closetcougar]

I missed that about the failing grades, the first time I looked.

*they changed his grades???* If so, I think that can wrong can be righted - how would they get away with that? Is it part of policy? If a straight A student violates the "homosexual conduct" rule (or whatever they call their policy), the university is permitted to alter his grades??? I doubt it.

That action needs to be challenged.

This has happened to students at BYU as well. I don't think that this has ever been challenged, although it might after this semester.

[Daniel]

See the link below:

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/04/041906kyStudent.htm

[NathanATX]

See the link below:

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/04/041906kyStudent.htm

Awesome! That's really great!

[Jamie McDaniel]

I drove down to Williamsburg this morning for the rally. I just got back a few minutes ago. It was great to see the students speaking out against Jason being expelled. There were about 5-6 students from the University of the Cumberlands. The rest were from other Kentucky schools.

It was discussed that the issue is not just that the University expelled a gay student, but that the school is also receiving $11,000,000 from the state.

Here are some pictures I took.

[trulyme212]

As far as grades...

I don't know how is works there but at my school if you are expelled you can't transfer the credits you took. It's like loosing everything.....

Not only are you kicked out but everything you ever did there disappears.

If that DOESN'T happen to him, he's lucky!

[f350guy]

Jamie,

I've been following this story and the bus riders on your web. You guys are doing a great job, plus I’ve been systematically reading everything on the web I can get my hands on. If they are getting moneys from the state that are tied to federal funding is there a way to cut them off if they are using discrimination as there bases or our we without a leg to stand on.

Rick

[f350guy]

PS: The money going to the school is our tax money too, what would it mean to the federal government if every gay person in America withheld payment to the student loan program till the laws allowed us to sit in any classroom supported by the program. The way it is now we have to hide our identity just to get on the bus, let alone sit at the back. I have five college degrees the last three I used federally supported student loans. If you withheld payments, they would have to be held in a trust fund with full disclosure to them. Its been done before on other disputes with the government, hick they do it. If a college is going to participate in the federal student loan program then the program has to be open to ALL students, they certainly don't want us LGBT's be DUM and not be able to pay all their taxes.

Rick

[Jamie McDaniel]

www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/14383798.htm (http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/14383798.htm)

[zacxdreyer09]

In the Kentucky Senate today senator Williams asked that senators call the number (502) 564-2611 and ask for "Ernie" and tell him to help pass the checks to get the University of the Cumberlands it's money to build a pharmacy school. Well, I say that why don't supporters of Jason Johnson call the same number and ask the Governor to not pass the checks!



Again that number is...

(502) 564-2611


... and remember.. ask for Ernie!

[Jamie McDaniel]

Here is the University's statement. You will notice the sentence, "...Jason is free to pursue his academic career at an institution which has values more in line with his own." To that I say the univeristy is free to pursue the $11 million from people who have values more in line with their own -- values that include keeping the university heterosexual only.

Statement of James Taylor, President
University of the Cumberlands

"Until now, the University has been unable to participate in the public discussion regarding Jason Johnson. Federal student privacy laws prohibit the University from disclosing records relating to students, including the disciplinary actions of the University.

Today the University and Jason reached an agreement which allows the University to speak, and allows him to complete this semester's course work for full academic credit.

Jason was suspended by the University for violating the University's code of conduct, which clearly states that students should not engage in sex outside of marriage, including homosexual acts, and that students who engage in such conduct may be suspended. We do not spy on our students and we do not put their personal lives under the microscope to find out who may be violating this policy. However, when it is brought to the administration's attention, as it was in Jason's case, that a student may be violating the code of conduct, the University investigates the charges and addresses any violations.

The University's mission is based on a specific set of be