Fallout after the Equality Ride

[Zerbie]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[schoolboi]

Originally Posted by Venari

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

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

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

[Venari]

Originally Posted by schoolboi

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

Schoolboi,

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

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

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

-Venari

[schoolboi]

Originally Posted by Venari

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

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

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

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

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

[themattperry]

Schoolboi --

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

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

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

[dr__dawggy]

Originally Posted by themattperry

Schoolboi --

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

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

[themattperry]

Originally Posted by dr__dawggy

[/B]

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

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

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

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

[awediot]

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

[schoolboi]

Originally Posted by themattperry

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

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

[Venari]

Originally Posted by schoolboi

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

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

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

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

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

-Venari

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by Venari

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

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

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

[themattperry]

Originally Posted by Venari

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

Venari,

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

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

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

I hope your weekend rocks!

Matt

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by Venari

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

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


-Venari

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

[Venari]

Originally Posted by themattperry

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

Matt,

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

I had addressed issues of how Jacob and Herrin have misrepresented important facts ... like saying in several interviews "Most of the schools are allowing them to visit." When in reality it is less then half. Also as I posted in another thread Media Coverage how it has been presented the CCCU supported the Equality Ride when in fact they officially state they do not.

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

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

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

-Venari

[Zerbie]

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

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

[awediot]

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

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

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

[themattperry]

Originally Posted by Venari

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Venari

I had addressed issues of how Jacob and Herrin have misrepresented important facts ... like saying in several interviews "Most of the schools are allowing them to visit." When in reality it is less then half. Also as I posted in another thread Media Coverage how it has been presented the CCCU supported the Equality Ride when in fact they officially state they do not.

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

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

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

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

Counts:

No visit:4
Visit: 13
Unknown: 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Venari

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

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

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

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

Let's take stock:

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

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

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

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

[schoolboi]

Great post Matt. Thank you.

[Venari]

Originally Posted by themattperry

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

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

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

Counts:

No visit:4
Visit: 13
Unknown: 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by themattperry

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-Venari

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by NorthCentral's Website Responsibilities of Membership

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

Originally Posted by Community Life Expectations at North Central U's website

Sexual Behaviors

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

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

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


http://www.northcentral.edu/studentl.../community.php

http://www.northcentral.edu/admissio...sibilities.php