Honesty.

[sailaway58]

Originally Posted by mmalm

Can you honestly tell me, judging by the comments of some of the people on this forum, that if protesters who actually picketed non-violently with anti-gay signs, that they would be welcomed with open arms when there is so much hostility just on this internet forum on which I am doing my best to be respectful?

If when the signs were put down the people could engage in a manner not patronizing, and if they could share dialog without the underlying agenda of saving my friends from their deceived and depraved minds, if the protesters could engage in a serious exchange of ideas, (The point of liberal arts college I would think) yes, they would be received with open arms.
By the way, not that it matters, but I am not Gay. I am a person who came to this site to understand from a group of people that live the experience every day of their lives what their perspective is. Before coming to this site I only listened to people, like me, that had an opinion based on prejudice, and scriptural interpretation that would condemn these people to a death by stoneing.
If you really want to understand listen to the people that live it every day. Christian brothers and sisters that for what ever reason or cause are Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual or Transgendered. They will never be anything but what God has created them to be. It is a choice and the choice was God's.
As a Christian we have one responsibility, to love others, period. One judge is enough and none of us are qualified for the job.
I have yet to meet an evil GLBT person but I have met and worshiped with hateful, judging, self righteous Christians all my life.
Evil exists but it is in the heart of a man not in his orientation.
Try starting with, I don't understand you folks, but I love, respect, accept you as equals in the eyes of God.

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by mmalm

Can you honestly tell me, judging by the comments of some of the people on this forum, that if protesters who actually picketed non-violently with anti-gay signs, that they would be welcomed with open arms when there is so much hostility just on this internet forum on which I am doing my best to be respectful?

You need to understand that most of the workers at soulforce do not post in these forums, and conversely, those of us who post regularly on these forums are not employees and not official spokespersons for soulforce.

We can offer our opinions, we can imagine a hypothetical situation based on what we know of past events and soulforce's mission statements.

honestly, were anti-gay protesters to show up and hold a non-violent protest, soulforce would be more than happy to meet with them, speak with them, reason together. The dialog is what we are looking for! there have been several soulforce Actions in which the target of the action has not only refused to meet with soulforce participants, but have actually closed down for the day or days that soulforce is in town. Imagine, these groups are so afraid of dialog that they have to lock the doors when the gays & lesbians and their allies show up!

I'm not sure why you think there has been hostility from us. You've said some offensive things here, if unintentionally, they were offensive nonetheless. Several have now explained why. One has pointed out to you that your original argument isn't really with the members of this forum, yet you seem to want to hold us responsible for something that we didn't write (blog), that we were not participants in (equality ride), and that we did not witness (a protest and an arrest). We get our information about those events from many sources. your willingness to come talk to us gives us a chance to address the misinformation you have about homosexuality. If there's an edge to our responses, it's because we've heard the kinds of statements you make before, and we know where they lead.

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by mmalm

Can you honestly tell me, judging by the comments of some of the people on this forum, that if protesters who actually picketed non-violently with anti-gay signs, that they would be welcomed with open arms when there is so much hostility just on this internet forum on which I am doing my best to be respectful?

I'm constantly amazed by people who come looking for a fight (no matter how "respectful" they are struggling to be) are shocked...shocked!...when they get one.

Before I even opened the thread for the first time, I knew from the title "Honesty." alone that this was going to be one of the challenging ones.

Amazing how that works.

With respect to anti-gay protesters at SF HQ, I, like others, have no doubt that dialogue would be attempted and welcomed.

I would, however, like to point out this "what if the shoe were on the other foot?" argument rings false to me. What exactly would these "non-violent, anti-gay signs" look like? How exactly would these be the flip-side of signs SF activists have used in the past?

Is it not one thing to attack a policy and quite another to attack a person?

[mmalm]

Alecto, I agree with you and understand that not everyone here is a member of SF and may not fully believe in the mission statement. I do, however, believe that the vast majority of people posting on this particular thread do believe in it, based on what they have said.

Posted by sailaway58:
If when the signs were put down the people could engage in a manner not patronizing, and if they could share dialog without the underlying agenda of saving my friends from their deceived and depraved minds, if the protesters could engage in a serious exchange of ideas, (The point of liberal arts college I would think) yes, they would be received with open arms.

Is that not exactly what SF tried to accomplish by coming to my school- having an agenda to save my friends from their "deceived and depraved minds"?

Originally posted by sailaway58:
Before coming to this site I only listened to people, like me, that had an opinion based on prejudice, and scriptural interpretation that would condemn these people to a death by stoneing.
If you really want to understand listen to the people that live it every day.

Is what you mean by this, that I should not use Scripture to determine my beliefs on this subject (I do not interpret Scripture to sake that GLBT persons should be stoned, for the record). It seems like you are saying that I should refer to people that live it every day over the Bible.

Originally posted by Sailaway58:
As a Christian we have one responsibility, to love others, period. One judge is enough and none of us are qualified for the job.

I think that we have more than one responsibly, but I absolutely agree that a huge one is to love others, and also wholeheartedly agree with the rest of that quote.

Originally posted by sailaway58:
I have yet to meet an evil GLBT person but I have met and worshiped with hateful, judging, self righteous Christians all my life.

I don't know if this is how you intended it to sound, but basically what you're saying here is that the only "evil", "hateful, judging, self-righteous" Christians are heterosexuals?

Originally posted by sailaway58:
Try starting with, I don't understand you folks, but I love, respect, accept you as equals in the eyes of God.

I believe I did start that way, when in my very first post I stated: "Although I may not agree with everything this group represents, I do respect it"

Originally posted by keltic63:
I'm not sure why you think there has been hostility from us.

It has not stemmed from everyone who has posted, but I take people telling me I am trying to be dramatic, that I am throwing a temper tantrum, and many other sarcastic remarks as hostile.

Also, keltic63 and dsdrane, you have both said that protests would be welcomed because it is the dialog you are looking for. I have not exactly felt welcomed on this thread, and have even been threatened by a moderator, even tho dialog is all that is happening.

Originally posted by dsdrane:
I'm constantly amazed by people who come looking for a fight (no matter how "respectful" they are struggling to be) are shocked...shocked!...when they get one.

Honestly, the sarcasm is getting old. Especially coming from a person who just said dialogue would be much welcomed. I'm sorry that, judging by your quotations around respect, you clearly don't believe that I am trying to be respectful. But do you really think you are right now? Honestly, it seems as if I am being asked to walk on eggshells here, while anyone else (not saying everyone has, mind you) is welcome to use biting sarcasm and say that I am throwing a dramatic temper tantrum. Also, in response to you thinking I "came looking for a fight," please refer to my earlier post:

For the record, I did not mean to start a huge slew of arguments by posting this thread. I'm sorry for anyone who may have gotten the wrong impression and thinks I just came to stir up trouble.

Finally,

Originally posted by dsdrane:
Is it not one thing to attack a policy and quite another to attack a person?

I'm not really sure what you are referring to here? Was it something I said? Please elaborate.

[paul]

mmalm,

I gotta say, some of your points strike me as salient, some not. You impress me as intelligent and articulate. I still think Zerbie described you well in her example.

I'm finding this an interesting discussion, as a frequent, albeit fairly new, contributer here. I'm not a Christian, so I'd be one of the ones who probably wouldn't qualify as representing the views of SoulForce.

Mmalm, since the topic of this thread is "Honesty," do you consider SoulForce to be a Christian organization? More to the point, do you think it's possible to follow Christ and be a gay person living in a sexual relationship with another gay person? Because, as you have no doubt observed, many here and the SoulForce organization does believe that possible. I think this is really the crux of the problem, isn't it?

I honestly don't know how SoulForce organizes their "protests" ("actions?"), but I am guessing that the organization probably doesn't just show up, pickets in hand. In other words, the places where these actions take place have advance notice of their arrival. So, I am curious why a Christian bible college wouldn't instead take the course of inviting the SoulForce group in for lunch, setting up a forum for all interested parties to discuss the topic at hand? Even if the general consensus at your school is that these gay folk are sinners, didn't Jesus eat with sinners? If you have the truth on your side, why wouldn't you invite the opportunity to discuss it in a loving, hospitable way?

Okay, I know you cannot speak for your college any more than I can speak for SoulForce, but what think you?

[BrentRichards]

Originally Posted by mmalm

If a student at Trinity had done something, say vandalized the SoulForce bus, do you think the group would have sought out that individual student or seen it as a reflection of the school as a whole and their feelings towards the group? I'm not trying to fuel the fire here, just giving a different perspective.

Riders have already responded to this situation ... see for example:

http://www.soulforce.org/article/771
http://www.soulforce.org/article/1193

In each case, the incidents seemed to create an even MORE positive dialogue at the schools ... it does not seem, in either case, that students at the schools were the ones doing the vandalism, nor was that assumption ever made by the riders.

Brent Richards, I sincerely thank you for clarifying on terminology for me. As far as the rest of what you said, there are obviously many things about the situation that we don't agree on, and I'm willing to leave it at that because I don't think there is a point to argue just for the sake of an argument that won't go anywhere.

This last sentence is somewhat troubling to me ... the assumption that this is an argument that won't go anywhere. For the record, this "argument" has gone plenty of places for me ... I'm a former staff member of Campus Crusade for Christ, I've studied at two VERY conservative theological seminaries, and was once VERY outspoken against gay-affirming theologies. Then I stopped arguing and started listening, to myself and others ... and the "argument" really got somewhere with me. There are certainly others who have changed their minds in the same or opposite direction. Any discussion without the possibility of "going somewhere" is a waste of breath. I learn and change my opinions on various topics all the time because of my discussions (a better word) here and elsewhere. I don't think you meant this badly, but it's a way of thinking worth pointing out and guarding against.

I am curious about one thing however- you talked about how you can expect things at these schools to stay exactly as they are without the protests. I'm wondering, and this is a serious question, if you know of how many schools have changed their doctrines as the result of SoulForce protests?

Soulforce's Equality Ride is only two years old, and institutional change takes time. Nor is institutional change the only goal of a project like this ... Soulforce receives dozens and dozens of letters during a campaign like the Equality Rides telling them what a difference they made to individuals ... whether by supporting them in their GLBT identity, or by challenging them to see things in a new way. That being said, if you were to read the various news items posted here about the stops on the Ride (or those in local media outlets as well), you'd see some very significant things: Not least of all, schools TALKED about the issue, which they otherwise might not have. Students at Messiah College, near my home, were galvanized by the visit to start a Gay-Straight Alliance for their campus. Students at Gordon College were emboldened (at least in part by the Ride) to speak out about their GLBT experience at Gordon in a profound printed set of testimonies distributed at the school. At several schools, the Ride called attention to policies many students didn't even know existed, and began discussion about whether they should. In one case (BYU), University policy was actually changed three weeks after the visit, in a positive direction ... according to administration, this was a direct result of the visit: "As a result of your visit, several students contacted the administration of BYU to ask about the University's Honor Code. Because of those questions and concerns, BYU has changed the code in significant ways." (see the story here: http://www.soulforce.org/article/1245.)

So are things exactly the same at these schools after the Ride? I'd say no. Are things "fixed?" Of course not. Was it worth it? Yup.

Dsdrane, I was certainly not trying to equate Christianity with homosexuality, I'm sorry if it came off that way. I was simply trying to clarify my usage of the word practicing, because it offended some people. After re-reading my post I could see how it could come off that way, and I definitely didn't mean it in that way, I was just trying to use a different context to show why I didn't not think "practicing" was an offensive word.

The different context is exactly the point. I too am a PRACTICING Christian. And a PRACTICING Republican (for which I take endless grief among many of my friends). I'm even a PRACTICING father of teens (and believe me, that takes practice ... I'm just starting to get the hang of it, and now they're becoming adults!) I am not, on the other hand, a PRACTICING Welshman, or a PRACTICING high-risk for skin cancer person, or a PRACTICING homosexual. This things are parts of my givens (each in different ways) that I can't choose, though I can choose to ignore them and pretend they're not there --perhaps to my peril.

[BrentRichards]

It is a choice and the choice was God's.

Tim, I love you more all the time. You are beautiful. (And apparently, you might even be a little Calvinist! )

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by mmalm

Honestly, the sarcasm is getting old.

Frankly, so is this discussion.

Originally Posted by mmalm

Honestly, it seems as if I am being asked to walk on eggshells here....

Mmalm, your participation here is strictly voluntary.

Originally Posted by mmalm

Also, in response to you thinking I "came looking for a fight," please refer to my earlier post.

Protest all you want, but I'm not buying it. To paraphrase an old -- and somewhat crude -- saying: don't urinate down my back and tell me it's raining.

You clearly came here in an attempt to "catch" SF in a perceived hypocrisy.

Originally Posted by mmalm

I'm not really sure what you are referring to here? Was it something I said? Please elaborate.

When SF shows up to shine a light on policies that we believe are fundamentally discriminatory, we are addressing a policy. Your theorectical "non-violent, anti-gay protesters", on the other hand would be attacking people...who they are and how and whom they love.

The reversed analogy of yours, therefore, is a false one. It is apples and oranges.

[BrentRichards]

Originally Posted by mmalm

Can you honestly tell me, judging by the comments of some of the people on this forum, that if protesters who actually picketed non-violently with anti-gay signs, that they would be welcomed with open arms when there is so much hostility just on this internet forum on which I am doing my best to be respectful?

MM

I (we) hear this a lot. We hear a million variations on the theme of "What are you people so touchy about?" Are you meeting some hostility, tension, and frustration here? Yes you are. Would you like to understand why? Here's what I had to say on the topic to a visitor here some time ago who probably had some similar beliefs to you, though he made no effort whatsoever to avoid being offensive about stating them. I'm not saying what I wrote then applies to you now. I'm saying it applies very much to the idea of why more than a few of us here are a little angry, and a little touchy, over hearing the same stuff over and over and over ...

Yes, _________, I am angry. I'm very angry. I know I'm not the only one here... in my observation, we take turns having no patience with certain types of discussion on these forums.

At the moment, I am very angry indeed with the words and attitudes of a lot of people in the church who talk like you. You are, admittedly, taking the brunt of my anger at a lot of other people as well. My last few posts to you have been very sharp, yes ... and for a reason. I was hoping to get your attention. Have I?

It may be that you feel you're being attacked and persecuted here: certainly by me, and perhaps by others as well. If so, you now know how we feel in the church EVERY DAY OF OUR LIVES.

True confessions, I am making some assumptions about you based on your statements here, and if those assumptions are wrong, I'm sorry. But yes, I'm angry, and I'll be happy to tell you why.

I'm angry because people who talk like you assume that I'm the problem. They come to our forum, start arguments, and then act surprised when I take offense.

I'm angry because almost every day I deal with Christians, many of whom weren't even born when I came to faith, who assume that they are far more mature in the faith than I could possibly be. They assume that I must be ignorant of the Bible and Christian history, because if I knew what they knew, I'd obviously agree with them.

I'm angry because so many of my GLBT brothers and sisters (on this forum and elsewhere) have been told in no uncertain terms that they have no place in the body of Christ. They've taken the hint, and left the church, never looking back. But having been ushered unceremoniously out the door, they must still deal day after day with people telling them they're lost for leaving.

I'm angry when people begin their interactions with me on the assumption that I need to be witnessed to ... a statement that assumes I cannot be a Christian (your recent statement of us "both being Christians" notwithstanding). After all, they say (sometimes overtly and sometimes covertly), if I were REALLY a Christian (or really a Spirit-filled Christian, or really under Christ's Lordship, or ... choose your particular language) I wouldn't be gay, or believe what I believe.

I'm angry when people use God's Holy Word as a weapon to make me and others like me feel unwelcome at the foot of the cross, and then accuse me of being defensive when I disagree.

I'm angry when people (and I don't mean you here, I have no idea what kind of education you have) with a Sunday School level Bible and Theological education think they've got it all down pat, and are perfectly willing to dismiss dissenting scholarly viewpoints (on topics like the Biblical view of homosexuality) without so much as a moment's consideration, because they're "obviously" wrong.

I'm angry that my church is perfectly willing to accept my money, my voice in their choir, my time in service, my skills in teaching, and so on, but is NOT willing to offer me a voice in leadership, a place in the clergy, or a blessing for my (future, I hope) covenanted partnership.

I'm angry that the straight majority has the nerve to talk about "the dangers of the gay agenda" as if we were the ones in power opressing THEM.

I'm angry that Christians assume that I'm a pervert, promiscuous, and a danger to their children and families. I'm angry at being blamed for the downfall of a marriage institution in which I'm not even permitted to participate.

I'm angry that so many Christians continue to tell me and others like me "Jesus hates you, this I know."

I'm angry that to so many people who talk like you consider me an "issue" to discuss. This isn't an issue, this is my life --don't expect me to discuss it as dispassionately as if it were a grocery list.

I'm angry that so many Christians consider it blasphemous, or at least laughable, to say that God might actually have created me like this ... and that those same people shout loudly about God being in control, except of course when Him being in control would mean something they don't like.

I'm angry that you can call another member of this forum self-righteous, but when I call you on what I see as your self-righteous behavior, I'm attacking your character, and it's suddenly unacceptable.

I'm angry that you can laugh off my concerns and opinions, but I'm supposed to take you seriously.

As you know, Jesus got angry, and he cleared the Temple court ... the buyers and sellers there were taking up the space that was supposed to be used for worship by the outcasts and foreigners ... people who the religious of the day had no problem sweeping out the door ... after all, they have no real place here. I'm angry that we still don't seem to get the point.

You want me to stop talking to you? Happy to. In fact, if you read my last post, I already said I would. But if you want to know why I'm so angry, there it is. Talk to me like a person, not an issue, and we'll go on. Play games with ulterior motives (which you stated up front) and I'm not playing.

So yes, I'm angry. Very angry. I won't apologize for being angry. If I've directed any of this anger at you unjustly, I can certainly be sorry for that. But the fact is that you've talked just like all the other people who have treated me and others like me this way for too long. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I'm going to assume it's a duck. If you want me to respond differently to you, you'll have to start by talking differently to me. Evangelism begins with understanding. When it begins with statements that you disagree with "95%" of what we believe ... (translation, you are TOTALLY wrong about just about everything, and I'm here to straighten you out [pun apt, though not intended]), then you can't very well be surprised that I'm resistant to anything you might say next.

So maybe I have a reason or two to be angry.

[Daniel]

Brent- I remember when you wrote this. And your words still move me deeply. From the bottom of my heart- thank you!

[dsdrane]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Brent- I remember when you wrote this. And your words still move me deeply. From the bottom of my heart- thank you!

Moi aussi, mon petit bijou!

Merci beaucoup!!

[Don't ask me...I was just feelin' the French. I have no clue why.]

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by dsdrane

Moi aussi, mon petit bijou!

Merci beaucoup!!

[Don't ask me...I was just feelin' the French. I have no clue why.]

What exactly IS a "Bijou" anyway? And I remember Brents post too. Very powerful! Thanks Brent!

[sailaway58]

Posted by sailaway58:
If when the signs were put down the people could engage in a manner not patronizing, and if they could share dialog without the underlying agenda of saving my friends from their deceived and depraved minds, if the protesters could engage in a serious exchange of ideas, (The point of liberal arts college I would think) yes, they would be received with open arms.


Is that not exactly what SF tried to accomplish by coming to my school- having an agenda to save my friends from their "deceived and depraved minds"?


Absolutely not. In your college you have gay people that are oppressed and shamed into the closet. Soulforce, (my opinion) is there for them. It is there to open dialog in not only your college community but surrounding areas that are touched by these Equality Rides. Because of this one ride you are talking to a group of people you never heard of before (Soulforce). You are learning how to address them respectfully. This one ride has engaged you to the point that you must now decide what you believe about Gods' GLBT children.


Originally posted by sailaway58:
Before coming to this site I only listened to people, like me, that had an opinion based on prejudice, and scriptural interpretation that would condemn these people to a death by stoneing.
If you really want to understand listen to the people that live it every day.

Is what you mean by this, that I should not use Scripture to determine my beliefs on this subject (I do not interpret Scripture to sake that GLBT persons should be stoned, for the record). It seems like you are saying that I should refer to people that live it every day over the Bible.

What I mean by this is now you have something to decide. Is what I believe about scripture, what I have been indoctrinated to believe, the belief system I have found comfort in founded in truth? Does what I believe equate with the realities of life? Am I right about orientation?

Originally posted by Sailaway58:
As a Christian we have one responsibility, to love others, period. One judge is enough and none of us are qualified for the job.


I think that we have more than one responsibly, but I absolutely agree that a huge one is to love others, and also wholeheartedly agree with the rest of that quote.

What responsibility's do we have that do not fall under Christs command to love others? It is our call, to love those that hate you, love your neighbor, they will know we are Christians by our love, What you have done to the least of these you have done to me. Why feed the hungry? Why take car of the widows? Why visit the jails? Why interact with those outside of Christ? Because we are called to love.

Originally posted by sailaway58:
I have yet to meet an evil GLBT person but I have met and worshiped with hateful, judging, self righteous Christians all my life.

I don't know if this is how you intended it to sound, but basically what you're saying here is that the only "evil", "hateful, judging, self-righteous" Christians are heterosexuals?

My point is Homosexuality is not evil, nor are homosexuals.
I have spent the last 48 years in the Christian fundamentalist movement. They would tell you otherwise. What say you?

Originally posted by sailaway58:
Try starting with, I don't understand you folks, but I love, respect, accept you as equals in the eyes of God.

I believe I did start that way, when in my very first post I stated: "Although I may not agree with everything this group represents, I do respect it"


...but I love, respect, accept you as equals in the eyes of God?
Would you believe the stories of the lives here? How they came to know who they are? Will you read any stories about anyone here?
Someone please suggest a book she should read... will you read it?

[sailaway58]

Originally Posted by BrentRichards

Tim, I love you more all the time. You are beautiful. (And apparently, you might even be a little Calvinist! )

Arminian all the way. And I prefer to consider myself handsome.

[BrentRichards]

Originally Posted by sailaway58

Arminian all the way. And I prefer to consider myself handsome.

Well, I still like you. Arminians are chosen people too ... .

How about handsome with a beautiful soul?

[paul]

Originally Posted by u-dog

What exactly IS a "Bijou" anyway? And I remember Brents post too. Very powerful! Thanks Brent!

it means kisses U-dog

[Zerbie]

We must always value the human being above a book. Any book.

Have you ever looked into the eyes of a book and read pain there? Neither have I. But I have read pain in the eyes of human beings - far too much of it. Not only pain. Light. That light is far more alive in the human soul than in paper marked with ink.

[sailaway58]

Originally Posted by BrentRichards

How about handsome with a beautiful soul?

I think I like that! Your not really a 50 year old chubby drunk woman are you?

[sailaway58]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

We must always value the human being above a book. Any book.

Have you ever looked into the eyes of a book and read pain there? Neither have I. But I have read pain in the eyes of human beings - far too much of it. Not only pain. Light. That light is far more alive in the human soul than in paper marked with ink.

Yea but sugest a book, like Stranger at the Gate or something.

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by sailaway58

Yea but sugest a book, like Stranger at the Gate or something.

How about Stranger at the Gate by Mel WHite?