BYU Visit

[maklelan]

I just read an article about the Equality Ride's visit to BYU. I'd like to talk about my experience with it and about a fallacy that continues to be promulgated by the Soulforce website. I have been in contact with one of the co-directors of the Equality Ride for the past week and we organized a visit for them and a group of my friends. I wanted to show the Riders what BYU students are really like and give them an opportunity to tell BYU students, directly, what they want to see come of their visit. I went to the Kiwanis park get together and the first thing I saw was a kid with an "anarchist" belt buckle talkign about how being gay was a choice for him, and that being a pervert was his best quality. I got a little concerned about our gathering in light of this kid's attitude, but I was later assured that the Riders were just as dissapointed with his presentation as I was. They said they had no idea he was gonna go off like that, but it was obvious the kid was just trying to play the crowd.

Later I met with the co-director and she introduced me to the Riders who would be visiting with us. Apparently, some of the Riders were a little concerned with the idea of meeting privately with a group of Mormons, so they decided against coming. I brought two Riders with me in my car and a friend took another three to grab something to eat. After about half an hour of sitting in our apartment rec-room talking, we got a good sized crowd and began talking. We sang a hymn, had prayer and I shared a scripture. Then I explained the LDS position on homosexuality. I'd like to point out that none of the articles or forums on this website accurately portray that position.

From an article: "Brigham Young University's student conduct policy prohibits LGBT students from attending the school." School policy does NOT prohibit the enrollment of LGBT students. The Riders I visited told me that their impression was that openly gay students are opressed and expelled. The article says they face suspension and expulsion. While many students here harbor feelings of resentment towards gays and lesbians, policy does not automatically expell anyone for just being gay. Some stories were shared of students who were expelled fourty years ago for coming out, and we then shared some stories of current students who are openly gay and have no problems. Whatever happened fourty years ago is not the current poilicy and is not indicative of ongoing church policy.

One of the Riders said the visit to BYU was their favorite, and that they had better discussions with the students here than anywhere else. From the same article that the above quote was taken: "It was truly remarkable," said Equality Rider Jonathan Awtrey, "I don't think we've had crowds like this at any other school where we weren't openly welcome on campus. Many of the students wanted to know what they could do to make LGBT people feel safe and welcome at their school. Several of them were concerned that their church's message of love was being diluted by its anti-gay stance." The article does, however, attempt to portray a level of intimidation and helplessness with this statement: "University administrators and security officers wearing dark suits and earpieces milled around in groups of two or three watching them closely. Single Riders had to answer questions from crowds as large as 25-30 students, carefully regulating their voices so as not to appear to be making a public speech." The security officers monitor every demonstration like this and are there to protect the students' interests, not to opress or scare. Are you one of the ones recognizing that we love and care for all, or one of the ones that prefers to showcase our belief despite that love?

This statement is misleading: "The Riders and their supporters were arrested because of stringent guidelines set down by the university in order to restrict dialogue during the Equality Ride stop." This statment seeks to perpetuate some idea that the rules were tightened in anticipation of the visit, but the guidelines mentioned were laid down decades ago and apply to every single person who steps foot on our campus, including us. We recently had a protest from our own students and they had to follow all the same rules. The Riders showed us the rules they were e-mailed and they're the exact same ones we receive when we ask for permission to demonstrate. Our students are currently engaged in attempts of their own to speak with administrators about other policies and they are facing the same setbacks. Nothing has changed in a special effort to oppress you.

This is the statement that is most misleading: "In addition to this policy, the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints has opposed the equality and dignity of LGBT people, in church and in society, with particular virulence." This is simply not true. Whoever wrote this article made several glaring and fallaciuous assumptions. The church as an entity believes that all people are equal in God's eyes and should be equal in ours. We strive to achieve charity for absolutely all, irrespective of anything, and our recent General Conference our President reiterated those feelings. The church's policies are not the cause of the suicides that have taken place, the misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church are the cause.

The Riders who visited with us said they loved the experience, and I did too. I was incredibly impressed by the preparation and the maturity of their message, and I hope they feel the same about us. I definitely learned something and I hope they did too, but this article is propagandized beyond belief, and I ask that you recognize it is not accurate or authoritative.

[Vanessa White]

Maklelan: I want to thank you for your post, and am so glad that the visit by the Riders to your school was so positive for you and the other students, and for the riders as well. The issue of an accurate portrayal of school policies, experiences, etc., is a definite source of miscommunication in terms of trying to make effective change. I don't think that we don't always have to like each other's opinions, or even understand them easily. But we have to be accurate in what we report, otherwise our cause gets lost in the translation.

I strongly believe that a great deal of miscommunication that occurs in our world and between people is because of the individual way that each of us see the world- our own perception of it. We view the world through whatever colored lenses suit us (mine are rose colored much of the time) and that is what we then create as our own truth. Even if a person shows me some information counter to what I believe, I cannot always comprehend/understand/have willingness to listen due to my own perception of the situation, based on my experiences, background, etc.

Part of what I continue to learn on a daily basis is to try to look at any situation from the lenses of others, or to at least consider them in my opinion. Many persons that believe that homosexuality is wrong and a choice believe it for reasons that I may not identify with or understand, but reasons that are real and meaningful to them. Maybe I cannot help them to see the issue through a different set of lenses, but I can try, and try to see how it is they learn what they learn as well.

THank you for sharing your positive experience, and your feedback about the article with us. I really appreciate your input. Blessings and Peace, Vanessa

[themattperry]

"Advocacy of a homosexual lifestyle (whether implied or explicit) or any behaviors that indicate homosexual conduct, including those not sexual in nature, are inappropriate and violate the Honor Code. Violations of the Honor Code may result in actions up to and including separation from the University."

Maklelan,

I appreciate you sharing your experiences with us about the ride. I'm glad you got to meet the riders, etc ... and it was cool to hear you got a chance to dialog with many of them. I'm sure it was helpful to you and to them, and it sounds like it was a good meeting.

BYU does indeed have in place what amounts to a ban on gay students:

Or perhaps I should put it this way. Under the policy above, I am, as you say, perfectly welcome to enroll in BYU as a glbt person as long as I don't:

- advocate my "homosexual lifestyle" (whether implied or explicit)
As if this provision could possibly be more insulting to a gay person! First of all, I have a life just like everyone else, not a "lifestyle". Second, there is no such thing as a "homosexual" lifestyle. There are only homosexual people with many ways of life. And most importantly, the wording implies that I cannot be my own advocate and speak out for the way that I live. Anyone who is stripped of their own self-worth ... ie -- told that they live and exist in a way unworthy to be uttered out loud with pride ... this person becomes less than human.

- advocate any behaviors that indicate homosexual conduct, including those not sexual in nature So no holding hands? No acting effeminately? No saying that someone of the same gender is cute? No flirting? No innocent dating? No red vinyl pants? No listening to Rufus Wainwright? Ok ... I'm being silly, but where -- honestly -- could it end? This is the stuff that witch hunts are made of and the kind of rule that could easily implicate perfectly straight people who just act the "wrong" way.)

Maclelan, you said about your conversation w/ the riders:

we then shared some stories of current students who are openly gay and have no problems

Then I can only assume that the rule on the books at your school goes unenforced. If this is the case, then let's get it off the books. Would you join me in calling for the removal of this vestigal rule?

Or, maybe it is enforced only selectively? But how on earth could you be a proud, openly gay man and not fall victim to this honor code rule if it was actually enforced as written?

The fact is that BYU's honor code provision is one of the most draconian, wide-ranging (yet meticulous) anti-gay policies that I have ever read, anywhere. I don't think that it mis-characterizes the rule to call it -- in essence at least -- a ban on gay people at BYU. Whether it is enforced on the ground is something I would like to hear your impression of Maklelan.

Also, if you really want to change the hearts of the bigoted LDS members who you claim are the real problem for gay Mormons (as oposed to church policy or teaching) ... then I suggest you change rules like this that can only lend credibility and fuel to their attitudes.

[Emproph]

{This thread:}

Originally Posted by maklelan

The church's policies are not the cause of the suicides that have taken place, the misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church are the cause.

I definitely learned something and I hope they did too, but this article is propagandized beyond belief, and I ask that you recognize it is not accurate or authoritative.

{The other thread}

Originally Posted by maklelan

You define yourself by your sexuality, and I don't. You're perfectly allowed to believe the things you want, and I'm not telling you to stop, I'm just trying to defend my right to do the same. Do you still feel you need to attack that right?

So you’re attempting to make a distinction between your attitude of defining me as a person who defines myself solely by my sexuality as being an example of “love and care for all” as opposed to the misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church?

Defining LGBT people as people who define themselves solely by their sexuality IS AN ATTACK! Total and complete projection on your part. You are the quintessential example of the “misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church” that you wish to distinguish yourself from. Not seeing your
attitude as exactly the same demonstrates amply that you are in ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION to be determining the delusional status of ANYONE else.

The assertion is that I am so delusional, that I do not know the difference between Being and Behavior. I’m delusional, you know that I don’t think that I’m delusional, yet you call me delusional with no evidence other than your personal religious assumption. If you don’t see how that could and 99% of the time WOULD be taken as insulting, then I'm NOT the one with the problem here.

{From the other thread}

Originally Posted by cris

(If you say that there is no discrimination against them for this, only for their behavior, I respond by reminding you that you have a choice of dating and marrying. They don’t.)

Originally Posted by maklelan

And your beliefs grant you the right to engage in pre-marital sex, as well as many other liberties that my beliefs preclude me from participating in. Who's being discriminated against more?

That response to what cris said is easily as idiotic as it gets. People like you make enforce and vote for laws that prevent me from marrying the Love of my life, and you have the gaul to accuse me of the sin of premarital sex as a privelege of my “beliefs” that discriminate against what you CHOOSE to believe? Are you insane?

And another thing, you never responded to awediot’s question referring to the REASON for your beliefs.
{Other thread}

Originally Posted by awediot

Can you defend them without resorting to “they told me so?"

Until you can do so, your beliefs about me are as relevant as my belief that it's still raining on Neptune.

{Same quote as first in this post from this thread}

Originally Posted by maklelan

The church's policies are not the cause of the suicides that have taken place, the misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church are the cause.

I definitely learned something and I hope they did too, but this article is propagandized beyond belief, and I ask that you recognize it is not accurate or authoritative.

You exemplify what is wrong with your church, and your personal misguided attitudes of bigotry are the ONLY reason that the Soulforce Equality Ride is even necessary, to save lives. And what’s your number one concern and priority in regard to the knowledge that your church via attitudes like yours are responsible for causing suicides? That you're not being depicted as only showing love and care for all.

That’s because you don’t show love and care for all, which means that you see truth as propaganda. You’re not even in a position to determine the accuracy of your own behavior let alone be complaining about the way it’s perceived by others!

{From www.equalityride.com, April 11th}
“BYU junior Matt Kulisch, a member of the Latter Day Saints, and one of the students who participated in the action, cited his faith as part of his motivation for being arrested with the Equality Riders.”

Matt Kulisch has the red carpet here and makes your church and it’s members like you look good. He’s in a position to make every complaint and request that you have made here and more, MUCH MORE. He is worthy because he’s giving out of selflessness for the purpose of sharing understanding, and NOT asking for undeserved respect out of a misguided sense of self righteousness.

You can call your assumptions faith, you can call you faith knowledge, you can call my making a distinction between your assumptions and what you believe to be facts, blasphemous. The point is that I don’t respect the reasons for your beliefs, the argument begins and ends there.

Because the Bible or the Book of Mormon "says so" is not a reason, nor is "I believe" other humans are prophets who could do no wrong a reason, In fact such an attitude it is actively irresponsible.

When you define beliefs that harm others as an expression of love and care for all, those of us whom those beliefs harm are in EVERY position to put those beliefs under intense scrutiny!

[byustudent]

id like to reply to this comment. i attend byu and have for the past 2 years and i am bisexual. to say that those that attend byu and have homosexual feelings are not looked down upon, discriminated against, or can even be open about it is completely wrong. i am not open about it because if i do guess what, the administration comes after you. i abide the honor code and dont have relationships with other guys but do have those feelings. i thought that i would talk to my bishop about it and see how understanding he was, well the the day after i met with him, i got called into the office to speak to someone about me being gay. we are told to go to our priesthood leaders and they would help us, counsel us and so forth and i did that in trust that it was between him and i. instead im in the honor code office for 2 hours with them grilling me as to any little thing that i have done. i told them i just told my bishop that i had feelings and that was all. now i feel like im on a leash and they are waiting for me to step out of line. its not really the students that are the ones to worry about, alot of them are open and understanding. its the so called righteous administration. out of the 4 apartments that i have lived in while here at byu, in all of them i have seen numerous students that have honor code violation and nothing will be done about it. i have had roomates that girlfriends stay the night in their room and are there when i awake in the morning, i have seen massive groups have gambling parties, and so forth. so there is a double standard at byu. as long as your straight you will be ok, if you show the slightest sign of homosexuality, the honor code office is all over it. for such a christ centered school, it is not very christ-like. Christ taught us to love all your neighbors and enemies. He did not say love them but only if they are not gay, or of color, or if they are fellow members. He said love ALL. i have not had any homosexual relationship so i have not broken the honor code, nor have i broken any "covenants" i have made by admitting that all i have is feelings, but that is enough to warrent discrimination on byu

[closetcougar]

Maklelan,
I am glad to hear that you got in touch with th codirector. I, too, was turned off by the bitter ex-mormon who did not at all promote the beliefs of Soulforce. I did find him humorous, but cringed when I thought of the BYU students who were trying to open their minds, only to be hit with this moron. At the dinner I had withSoulforce, their disapproval for they yay-hoo was brought up several times spontaneously. You are incorrect, though, to state that BYU does not discriminate solely on the basis of feelings. There are dozens more stories like byucougar's. However, I also had a friend who told one of her professors she was gay and her professor was very supportive and understanding. I think you get both. The odd thing is that every time the LDS members or leaders do something mean or hurtful, they chalk it up to being human and it not being the gospel. I think it's time the the church owns both their teachings AND their actions.

[themattperry]

It's been great to read about the real life experiences of you guys at BYU, and I just want to say that you have an immense amount of courage to stay there and persist despite the heavy load you carry.

Also, in my position, I'm only able to read what the policies of your schools are, and draw my own conclusions from what is written down. Hearing how these policies are implemented and affect you brings life to the situation for me ...

That said, regardless of how rigorously or consistently they are enforced -- or not -- BYU's horrendous policy is still there in black and white. In your opinions, what would it take to change/soften this policy? Is that even possible?

Good luck to you all!

[byustudent]

in my opinion, the only way that that policy will ever change, is if the church receives "revelation" that it is alright for homosexuals to be in the church. and to be quite honest, that will never happen. according to church doctrine, it will never be allowed and so byu will always be against homosexuals. i understand that it is a private university and when you elect to go there, you agree to their terms and that is valid. it is not valid however to hunt them down as they sometimes do and to look down upon any person regardless of their sexual orientation.

[revtj]

In the 1970s, Brigham Young University, Paula Houston's alma mater, developed a repertoire of electroshock techniques aimed at straightening out gay Mormon men. In America's Saints (1984), Robert Gottlieb and Peter Wiley relate that at the same time, the church "stepped up surveillance and spying, particularly at BYU.... Surveillance of gay bars in Salt Lake City was commonplace, and lists were drawn up that identified 'persons involved in lewd behavior.' At the peak of the campaign against gays, the BYU security force was granted statewide power by the Mormon-dominated legislature...." Collaborating with the Utah Highway Patrol, BYU agents began participating in raids on public bathrooms and roadside rest stops.

In 1978, Apostle Boyd K. Packer delivered an address that retains the force of doctrine, in which he called homosexuality "a condition that draws both men and women into one of the ugliest and most debased of all physical performances." The pervasiveness of Packer's attitude was reflected in the Salt Lake School District's willingness to ban all extracurricular clubs in local high schools rather than accept the presence of a Gay/Straight Alliance chapter. (The ban ended October 2000 after a long struggle in and out of court.) Utah was the first state to pass an anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

From an article byBy Jim D'Entremont, 2001

There has been at least one documentary produced, interviewing the gay men who were subjected to aversion therapy at BYU back then. While the violent means have changed in form, the deeply engrained homophobia obviously still exists.

My prayers go out to all LGBT students at BYU.

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Emproph

So you’re attempting to make a distinction between your attitude of defining me as a person who defines myself solely by my sexuality as being an example of “love and care for all” as opposed to the misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church?

The vast majority of the gays and lesbians I have met in my life have put their sexuality in he foreground of their psyche, and it has dictated their life accordingly. Not all have, and I am aware of that. In addition, I have learned a lot in the last couple of weeks, and I have changed the way I think in many arenas, so please disregard my statements from three weeks ago, especially if the ammo you seek to tear down my feelings is drawn from the juxtaposition of that thread and this one.

Originally Posted by Emproph

Defining LGBT people as people who define themselves solely by their sexuality IS AN ATTACK! Total and complete projection on your part. You are the quintessential example of the “misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church” that you wish to distinguish yourself from. Not seeing your
attitude as exactly the same demonstrates amply that you are in ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION to be determining the delusional status of ANYONE else.

I never said anyone was delusional, I just said that it was how many viewd themselves. You do not, and I agree with that. I have met a lot more gays and lesbians in the last couple of weeks that have corroborated what you're saying, and my feelings have changed, so please accept my apologies for misleading you. I will not respond to any more of your points drawn from the contrast of this thread to my last, as I feel my position on that is clear.

Originally Posted by Emproph

People like you make enforce and vote for laws that prevent me from marrying the Love of my life, and you have the gaul to accuse me of the sin of premarital sex as a privelege of my “beliefs” that discriminate against what you CHOOSE to believe? Are you insane?

"People like you"? Are you now going to wrap me up in a tiny little blanket of generalization and presumption? I support gay marriage and ideas on what does and does not constitute sin is somethng you choose to believe. I am not insane, and your indignation is clouding your judgment.

Originally Posted by Emproph

And another thing, you never responded to awediot’s question referring to the REASON for your beliefs.
{Other thread} Until you can do so, your beliefs about me are as relevant as my belief that it's still raining on Neptune.

That thread was closed, and I then lost interest in entering into dialogue with Soulforce, but my wonderful experience on Monday made me want to share my feelings. I apologize for not answering a question, but I don't know what it is. If you ask me again I'll be happy to answer.

Originally Posted by Emproph

You exemplify what is wrong with your church, and your personal misguided attitudes of bigotry are the ONLY reason that the Soulforce Equality Ride is even necessary, to save lives. And what’s your number one concern and priority in regard to the knowledge that your church via attitudes like yours are responsible for causing suicides? That you're not being depicted as only showing love and care for all.

I understand that I make a convenient target for your anger, but don't you ever accuse me of harboring attitudes that cause people to commit suicide. You haven't the foggiest idea who I am or what I believe. I invited Soulforce into my apartment when no one else did. I didn't do it as a token, I didn't do it for attention, I didn't do it to explain how they were wrong; I did it so my people could get to know their people, and vise versa. I helped my friends and myself get to know that gays and lesbians are absolutely no different than we are and I enjoyed every second of it, and they told me they did too. They're the ones out there on the road getting their hands dirty and they gave me a hug and thanked me while you slap me in the face with that litany and expect me to show you personally an increase in understanding and care? That attitude disgusts me and I'm done with this conversation.

Originally Posted by byustudent

according to church doctrine, it will never be allowed and so byu will always be against homosexuals

I think it is important that people, especially members, decouple the church's doctrine from the subculture that sometimes shrouds it. Here in Utah the difference is sometimes indistinguishable. There is no church doctrine in existence that says a change like that will never take place. I personally don't believe it will, but my beliefs are not doctrine. Some leaders of the church also stated that blacks would never get the priethood, but they wee wrong there, too. They say the only way to make God laugh is to tell Him your plans. Telling Him how He is going to act in the future is along those same lines.

Another point here is that BYU is not against homosexuals. BYU does not approve of homosexual relations, but BYU is not against any people personally. the argument is always levelled at me that BYU hunts down and destroys gays just for thinking about being gay. I'm told that they keep tabs on everyone's internet access and their habits. I'd like you to know that just about every time I've accessed this website in the last month it has been from a computer inside BYU administration buildings, logged on to my account. The Honor Code office has brought nothing to my attention, and I was in there yesterday to fix some problems with my eccesiastical endorsment. I will grant that ocassionally administrators with agendas make things difficult for gays, but that hardly reflects the doctrine of the church. When Soulforce was with my friends and I one of the girls in my ward explained how several members of one of her performance group are openly gay and no one cares. That made some of the Euality Riders blink a few times in rapid succession. I understand that all the information is not exactly first hand, and I understand that some gay BYU students have heard horror stories and have felt the prejudice lean on them, but the institution is not as bad as it is made out to be.

Originally Posted by themattperry

In your opinions, what would it take to change/soften this policy? Is that even possible?

The students here are in the middle of fighting for many different policies to change, and none of them are going to any time soon. The policies regarding BYU's stance on dealing with homosexuals has changed a lot in the past decade or so, and it may change in the future. The best way to do that is not to try to pressure the school. I told the Riders on Monday that if the policies change it will not be because of them, it will be because the students feel more comfortable around gays and lesbians. It will be because the school doesn't feel like it has to defend itself against attacks. It will be because the local gays and lesbians respect our beliefs and seek to find a middle ground. The church is not going to compromise its values and especially not at the demonstrating of a group demanding complete and total surrender. The Riders that we visited with respected our beliefs and our school. They expressed appreciation for their reception here and the concern of the students, but what they did not do is tell us we were wrong. They also didn't tell us we had to change our policy or allow them to engage in public displays of affection or private relations. Their main concern was how to make the atmosphere more palatable for the gay and lesbian student, and that attitude alone will soften the hearts of BYU.

[closetcougar]

Maklelan,
I apologize for making you out to be who I assume everyone is on BYU campus. I was wrong about you and I am sorry. Although we disagree on a few things which to me are very important, I still very much appreciate the way in which you have articulated things on this thred.

Originally Posted by maklelan

Another point here is that BYU is not against homosexuals. BYU does not approve of homosexual relations, but BYU is not against any people personally. I'm told that they keep tabs on everyone's internet access and their habits. I'd like you to know that just about every time I've accessed this website in the last month it has been from a computer inside BYU administration buildings, logged on to my account. When Soulforce was with my friends and I one of the girls in my ward explained how several members of one of her performance group are openly gay and no one cares. That made some of the Euality Riders blink a few times in rapid succession. I understand that all the information is not exactly first hand, and I understand that some gay BYU students have heard horror stories and have felt the prejudice lean on them, but the institution is not as bad as it is made out to be. .

I too am surprised at the openly gay students in the dance department. I would like to see that in action. I am open to being challenged about my views of the university, especially when my personal experiences tell me otherwise. Much of my experience is second hand as well, but when you get so many of the same experiences, it is hard to ignore. I would refer you to the affirmation website because there are a few accounts of openly gay students who got kicked out for doing nothing but being gay (within BYU standards) and then there are others who were able to openly flaunt it (within BYU standards) and nobody in the administration seemed to be able to touch them, not for lack of effort, however. I was at the lilly procession and one BYU student stated that he is on probation because somebody's yahoo site says he is gay. I don't know this student very well, though.

Originally Posted by maklelan

The students here are in the middle of fighting for many different policies to change, and none of them are going to any time soon. The policies regarding BYU's stance on dealing with homosexuals has changed a lot in the past decade or so, and it may change in the future. The best way to do that is not to try to pressure the school.

I could not disagree with you more. I know we have beat this subject to death, but the timing of black people receiving the priesthood and polygamy no longer being practiced are obviously related to the political movements at the time, and eerily coincidental at the least.

Originally Posted by maklelan

I told the Riders on Monday that if the policies change it will not be because of them, it will be because the students feel more comfortable around gays and lesbians. It will be because the school doesn't feel like it has to defend itself against attacks.

Again, the school was coming under academice censureship when they announced that black people would now be able to hold the priesthood. Civil disobedience and political movements in the past certainly seem to speak otherwise.

Originally Posted by maklelan

It will be because the local gays and lesbians respect our beliefs and seek to find a middle ground.

I couldn't agree more, and again, I am ashamed of the way the guy from NPR represented the gay community. However, it is quite difficult to not feel temporary bitterness with the LDS/BYU culture when it does indeed cause so much pain. This is my experience. I realize that you are not responsible for this pain, but it is my perception and many other gay and lesbian students' perceptions as well.
God bless you Mak,
CC

[themattperry]

Originally Posted by maklelan

The students here are in the middle of fighting for many different policies to change, and none of them are going to any time soon. The policies regarding BYU's stance on dealing with homosexuals has changed a lot in the past decade or so, and it may change in the future. The best way to do that is not to try to pressure the school. I told the Riders on Monday that if the policies change it will not be because of them, it will be because the students feel more comfortable around gays and lesbians. It will be because the school doesn't feel like it has to defend itself against attacks. It will be because the local gays and lesbians respect our beliefs and seek to find a middle ground. The church is not going to compromise its values and especially not at the demonstrating of a group demanding complete and total surrender. The Riders that we visited with respected our beliefs and our school. They expressed appreciation for their reception here and the concern of the students, but what they did not do is tell us we were wrong. They also didn't tell us we had to change our policy or allow them to engage in public displays of affection or private relations. Their main concern was how to make the atmosphere more palatable for the gay and lesbian student, and that attitude alone will soften the hearts of BYU.

Maklelan,

You know, I have to say that I am genuinely very happy to hear and clearly understand that SF's visit had a major impact on you! I can def. tell by what you have to say here and how you say it. What you have to say about common ground does ring true -- you obviously found some with the riders. Like I've said in previous posts, it is not my intention to tell you what to believe or anything like that. All we are here to do is seek justice.

When you say things like "The students here are in the middle of fighting for many different policies to change" .. that gives me alot of hope because it very much makes me think that you can clearly see at least why some of us wish this policy would change. That's something I didn't sense from you before. Frankly, your whole tone has changed ... and I'm sure you had an impact on the riders you met as well. This is what the ride is all about ... so thank God!

Of course, I don't really agree with you on your assessment of how change might occur -- I think that direct action and nonviolent resistence make a huge difference. If the resistance is sustained and focused, schools that still exclude and/or degrade glbt people and their allies will be bathed in the steady light of truth, and the consequences will flow. Young people in Europe and North America -- people of my generation and younger -- are less and less willing to tollerate glbt discrimination and, I would argue, less and less willing to apply to colleges that have rules like BYU's. BYU and other schools will begin to decline under the weight of their own injustice. Over time, they will experience a decrease in the quality and variety of applicants. Just think about 20-30-40 years from now. Who would then be willing to attend a school that discriminates against GLBT people? Probably the same types who would nowadays be willing to attend a college that does not enroll blacks? The sweep of history is catching up with this kind of prejudice, so whether or not the policy will change any time soon, my theory is that for proud institutions like BYU to survive and remain relevant in America, the choice (as in the case of the priesthood for African Americans) will be simply to change or slowly wither away.

Personally, I care enough about religious folk (I am one) that I do not think religious schools SHOULD die, just because of some really faulty, unjust rules. Let's change the rules, heal the wounds, and may BYU and schools like it thrive for many many years! That's what I'm willing to work towards anyway.

[Emproph]

maklelan, I read your rebuttal and I appreciate it very much.

My reply is taking a bit longer than I’d anticipated and I didn’t want to leave you hanging. I wasn’t expecting a response at all let alone a prompt, thorough, and courteous one with character.

[Emproph]

Re: Gays define themselves by their sexuality.

Originally Posted by maklelan

The vast majority of the gays and lesbians I have met in my life have put their sexuality in he foreground of their psyche, and it has dictated their life accordingly.

I didn’t realize this has been your experience. I think this is part of the problem, the tendency not to clarify the why of it. That’s something I could accept even if I felt it was erroneous perception on your part, it’s the fact that now I know it’s something you actually thought about that was based on first hand experience that makes the difference. Without that understanding it comes across as just another flippant negative stereotype.

Originally Posted by maklelan

Not all have, and I am aware of that. In addition, I have learned a lot in the last couple of weeks, and I have changed the way I think in many arenas, so please disregard my statements from three weeks ago, especially if the ammo you seek to tear down my feelings is drawn from the juxtaposition of that thread and this one.

Fair enough, and done.

Originally Posted by Emproph

Defining LGBT people as people who define themselves solely by their sexuality IS AN ATTACK! Total and complete projection on your part. You are the quintessential example of the “misguided attitudes of bigoted members of the church” that you wish to distinguish yourself from. Not seeing your attitude as exactly the same demonstrates amply that you are in ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION to be determining the delusional status of ANYONE else.

Originally Posted by maklelan

I never said anyone was delusional, I just said that it was how many viewd themselves.

You said this:

Originally Posted by maklelan

You define yourself by your sexuality, and I don’t. You’re perfectly allowed to believe the things you want, and I’m not telling you to stop, I’m just trying to defend my right to do the same. Do you still feel the need to attack that right?

In response to this:

Originally Posted by awediot

I cannot blame you for seeing my human need to bond and love and share and nurture as mere pleasures of the flesh. The fact it is as ingrained and Holy as your longing for a woman (?) and family is impossible for you to understand, and I will remain deludeing myself in your eyes. It is a measure of self mastery that is too much to ask. I nearly mastered suicide first and know the idea of giving up my life for the gospels INTIMATELY... My core, my essence and very Soul is the abominable sin you think I can just master. If I'd just get over that, I'd be ok. The inability to see we are GAY, not fighting off Gayness, does indeed teach I am an abomination.

awediot’s post screamed “I do not define myself by my sexuality!” So when you retort with this:

Originally Posted by maklelan

You define yourself by your sexuality, and I don’t.

That tells me you believe he is delusional, and because you did so after he made it a point to clarify with reasons facts and examples that this was not the case, that tells me you weren’t willing to entertain the idea that any gay person should be taken seriously. You dismissed him out of hand without explanation. Maybe you didn’t understand what he meant but the thread was riddled with responses like that. I don’t mean to belabor the point but I want to be clear that my conclusion and characterization of your attitude was not haphazard.

Originally Posted by maklelan

...You do not, and I agree with that. I have met a lot more gays and lesbians in the last couple of weeks that have corroborated what you're saying, and my feelings have changed, so please accept my apologies for misleading you. I will not respond to any more of your points drawn from the contrast of this thread to my last, as I feel my position on that is clear.

I appreciate that very much and had I understood the significance of your change I wouldn’t have viewed your previous thread as relevant and thus would not have gone off on a tirade.

Despite your change I want to be clear about something and I think it’s something you should be aware of.

Even if someone does think I’m delusional, I need to hear that word and the reasons for that conclusion. I may not like it but at least I can respect the courage it takes to be that honest. So that’s where my complaint lies in regard to those who disagree, not in the disagreement per se but in the deceptive way it is too often portrayed by those who should know better.

Example: “I’m not bigoted against those in the homosexual lifestyle.” If that person was truly not bigoted then they would know to make sure that they also said: “I realize homosexuals do not believe it is just a lifestyle and that my statement may be taken as offensive but it is not my intention to offend.”

That would be treating me the way I want to be treated, and thus, the credibility of that person’s claim of being a Christian would not be compromised. This may not be sufficient for many gay people, but the point is that it would demonstrate that the effort was taken to understand how homosexuals view themselves. It would better ensure that the “love” part of the “truth in love” message was not compromised, the most important part. You can’t expect someone to get the “truth” part of the message without the “love" part.

When you’re implying that you know better than me about my situation and you do not understand how insulting it is to dismiss my eye witness testimony of homosexuality being immutable, then that pretty much proves you do not know better than me, even if you’re right and I am delusional. Do you understand? This isn’t so much for you, I just wanted to explain it.

Originally Posted by maklelan

"People like you"? Are you now going to wrap me up in a tiny little blanket of generalization and presumption?

Well, yes I was... But I’ve changed now that we’ve been able to hash this out a bit. I admire the care you’ve taken in responding to my vitriol.

Originally Posted by maklelan

I support gay marriage and ideas on what does and does not constitute sin is somethng you choose to believe.

Again, I appreciate your open mindedness, not that we’re going to agree on everything, not even that that’s the point, it’s the conscious effort to understand better that is most important, that’s what I appreciate.

Originally Posted by maklelan

I am not insane, and your indignation is clouding your judgment.

Unless you misunderstood cris or I misunderstood you, your response was insane. I’ll admit that I’m indignant and that it can and does cloud my judgement at times, but unless you’re talking about me calling you personally insane as opposed to your response being insane, I don’t think it applies with this example, the response was out of line. Again, maybe you meant it differently than I took it. I’m open to that possibility now and I don’t feel the need to argue it with you anymore.

Originally Posted by maklelan

That thread was closed, and I then lost interest in entering into dialogue with Soulforce, but my wonderful experience on Monday made me want to share my feelings. I apologize for not answering a question, but I don't know what it is. If you ask me again I'll be happy to answer.

The question was can you defend your beliefs about homosexuality outside of “Because the Bible says so.” At this point it no longer applies, you've opened the door.

Originally Posted by maklelan

I understand that I make a convenient target for your anger, but don't you ever accuse me of harboring attitudes that cause people to commit suicide. You haven't the foggiest idea who I am or what I believe.

Most of us harbor attitudes like that. I think it’s important to be aware of them so that when we recognize those attitudes in ourselves we make the effort to resolve them instead of denying them. That’s not to say that it is our intention to cause people to commit suicide and I didn’t mean to imply that it was your intention.

Originally Posted by maklelan

I invited Soulforce into my apartment when no one else did. I didn't do it as a token, I didn't do it for attention, I didn't do it to explain how they were wrong; I did it so my people could get to know their people, and vise versa. I helped my friends and myself get to know that gays and lesbians are absolutely no different than we are and I enjoyed every second of it, and they told me they did too. They're the ones out there on the road getting their hands dirty and they gave me a hug and thanked me while you slap me in the face with that litany and expect me to show you personally an increase in understanding and care?

I get it. I was judging you by what you’d said before in the other thread, focused on what I wanted to in this one, and concluded they were the same because I saw no difference, no potential for increased understanding.

I re-read your original post in this thread with your response to my diatribe in mind and I realize that I didn’t take you seriously, I dismissed your efforts in meeting with the Equality Riders. The same insulting thing I accused you of.

For me it went from what you said in the other thread to meeting with Equality riders in this thread and ended with the complaint of propaganda. I took your telling of your experience as nothing more than ho-hum ‘matter of fact.’ When you ended on the propaganda note, it appeared to me that your experience with the Equality riders was take it or leave it and whatever increased understanding you’d gleaned was negligible.

I’m not blaming you, it’s not an excuse, I’m just explaining part of the reason your story didn’t have the impact on me that was intended. And again, I apologize. After reading your reply and realizing how much of an impact your meeting with the riders had, It means a lot to me, and I’m really glad to hear it. It gives me hope that change is possible, and the consequences of that understanding are much further reaching than with just you and I.

Originally Posted by maklelan

That attitude disgusts me and I'm done with this conversation.

I thought you weren’t even trying, it’s clear now that you were and are trying. I’m sorry for hurting you and attacking you like that. It was impetuousness on my part and I should have taken the time to be certain of your position before blasting you like that.

I'm sorry.

[maklelan]

I don't have much time. I appreciate your response and your sincerity. I apologize if it seemed a little intense, but I was taken aback a little by that post, so I got a little upset. I'm glad we can admit we both could have initially handled things better.