Day of the Golden Rule?
The Day of Silence is looming once again with concerns expressed from social conservatives about adult identity politics intruding into the schools. As occurred last year, some conservative groups are calling on parents to keep their kids at home on the Day of Silence (April 25 in most places).
I have a different idea. How about considering this day an opportunity to promote treating others the way you want to be treated? Perhaps kids could go to school equipped with index cards which have Luke 6:31 written, “Do to others as you would have them do to you” with a pledge to honor this Scripture. It seems to me that Christian kids could be leading the way with a pledge to keep the Golden Rule.
Could this approach be more productive than staying home?
Assuming you intend that as an expression that they’re genuinely supportive of gay students, rather than it being an underhanded FU to the Day of Silence (coming from any other source, it wouldn’t be a surprise), I’d say that’s a very Christlike option.
I support this idea.
I think the Day of Truth is sort of misguided and used incorrectly by some christians. I’d prefer it did not exist and instead children showed real care towards eachother as you suggest.
The problem with this of course is that it plays into the hands of putting the emphasis on gays, even if you’re trying to view it as countering the day with a day to speak out that everyone should treat anyone the way they would want to be treated, the fact that you’re doing during a pro-homosexual event ruins it. You wouldn’t have any reason to do it on that particular day if the “Day of Silence” didn’t exist.
If schools are going to allow this kind of peer-pressured, school allowed indoctrination parents should just as well let their kids stay home that day. That’s probably what I would do as a student as opposed to going and humoring it. I’d probably end up talking anyway and that would just leave a stupid impression.
Dave - It is a transparent suggestion. Even if we disagree, we can find common ground around mutual respect as taught by Christ.
I don’t get it. Why stay home? Forgive my ignorance, but is this something that the schools themselves are suggesting that schools should or must do — or only something GLSEN is promoting? Can someone fill me in?
Michael - I added a link to the Day of Silence website which describes it.
I read the Day Of Silence website and it sounded like GLSEN is promoting and organizaing this, but that students will be doing this on their own — being silent, holding a card that explains their silence, etc. I did not get the impression that the schools will be promoting this as something as some sort of official school function that all students should or must do. Am I correct?
I don’t understand why Christian parents would keep theri kids home just because some other kids will be maintaining a day of silence to bring attention to anti-gay violence and bullying. For one thing, this seems to assume that only Non-Christians would want to protest anti-gay hatred. I am still confused. What’s the problem?
Because the Day of Silence is directed at conservatice christians. I would think some parents just want to avoid the confrontation and conflict altogether.
Christian parents may want to avoid confrontation but the existence of DOS provides a teachable moment it seems to me.
I read the link to “conservative Christian” organizations (namely the AFA) that are encouraging their “Christian” kids to stay home. As if only non-believers would be opposed to anti-gay violence! They (the AFA) claim that the event is really about “coercing students to repudiate traditional morality”, promotoing “homosexual activism” and “pressuring students with a polarizing political agenda”.
Talk about reactionary! Consider this statement from the AFA: “GLSEN should cancel its celebration of that code of silence about the severe public health hazards of homosexual behavior, and any school administrator who continues to stand silent while enabling the promotion of such harmful behavior should be sued for criminal negligence.”
Criminal negligence? Come on. I read nothing on the Day Of Silence website about coercing students or promoting immorality — just a day to bring attendtion to the problem of anti-gat bullying and violence. You’re not pushing homosexuality by standing against anti-gay hatred, name-calling, bullying and violence. That’s something all real Christians should do. Isn’t that what the Golden Rule is all about?
There is no need for an alternative. Do conservative Christians think that violence against gays is wrong? If they think it is wrong, then they should support efforts to eradicate the violence. If they don’t think it is wrong, then they should stop saying they follow Christ.
I, for one, am tired of conservative Christians giving the implicit message that they either support the violence or prefer to ignore the violence. This is evidenced by the opposition to the Day of Silence and by their opposition to hate-crime legislation - apparently Christians are content to already be one of the protected groups because of their religion, even though they rarely suffer violence in this country for it, but oppose including groups who do suffer tremendous violence. Do not even try to spread the Golden Rule if you are not willing to explicitly, vocally decry violence against the glbt community. When I hear you loudly decry the violence against gays, then I might listen to what you have to say. Until then, you are a noisy gong and clanging cymbal - nothing else.
Nick - Maybe it is not clear what I mean. My alternative is not to the Day of Silence (although I am not a big fan of politics intruding in schools), I am suggesting that Christian kids can make a statement about tolerance and non-violence by affirming the teaching of Christ about loving others (treating others the way I want to be treated).
I agree with you Warren and think it is a wonderful idea and opportunity. I wll be sharing it with some of my teacher friends. Just getting the idea out there is a start.
Again, I object to the implication that it’s “Christians” and “Christian kids” on one side and those nasty, pro-gay activists pushing immorality and progay political agendas on the other. I agree with Nick. Real Christians take the risk that they may be seen as “”pro-sin” by speaking out against the mistreatment of gays. It’s what Jesus would have done. Read the account of the woman caught in adultery if you doubt that.
Nemario,
I think the message gets blurred. I doubt anyone I know wants violence perpetrated on anyone else - for any reason.
Warren, I appreciate the sentiment. However, there is a difference between words and deeds, with deeds being louder. A better approach is for Christian students to participate in the Day of Silence by being silent, just like those who oppose violence directed at gays, They can even wear a sign saying that they are “Conservative Christians opposed to violence against gays”. That, Warren would do more than handing out little cards saying people should follow the Golden Rule. It would be the Golden Rule in action. Deeds, not words.
Just imagine what would happen if “Christian” organizations joined forces with “Gay” organizations to stand together against the mistreatment of gays. People might get the impression that Christians actually care.
I think Warren has a point about this being a teachable moment.
There are plenty of Christians who don’t hesitate to condemn violence against gays, and they aren’t seen as being “pro-sin.”
As for the woman, Jesus told her to sin no more.
Nick and Michael,
You two seem to be suggesting that conservative Christian students join forces with the Day of Silence for the benefit of gay students above anyone else.
Warren’s suggestion is not aimed toward anyone in particular but everyone in general. You want Christians to single out a particular group for attention, when in reality no one should be singled out.
Do unto others, no matter who they are, not do unto others on this particular day who are part of this particular group.
“Nemario, I think the message gets blurred. I doubt anyone I know wants violence perpetrated on anyone else - for any reason.
Right, which just goes to show that this is an event with political and anti-religious motivations. Kids should either ignore it or stay home that day.
Steve,
Don’t belittle the tremendous violence done to gays and lesbians. Conservative Christians constantly use the “it’s not right to separate out a group for attention” verbage in this situation (or hate-crime legislation), yet they constantly do it when it serves their purposes. For example, when religion was considered being included in hate-crimes legislation, they were silent. When the disabled was considered being included, they were silent. When it was race, silence. When it was ethnicity, silence. When gays were considered, suddenly “Christians” found their voice. Apparently, it’s only wrong to single out a particular group when it is gays - when it’s Christians or anyone else it is ok to single them out.
The FBI indicates that gays & lesbians are the #3 recipients of reported hate-crimes. This is the reality that we face. The reality that we face is that conservative Christians regularly make statements about us that can inspire violence against us. For example, an Oklahoma state representative recently said that we are a greater threat to this country than terrorists. Those words can inspire violence against us. After all, our nation teaches us that if terrorists are a threat, we should get them before they get us. Well, gays are apparently worse than terrorists. While a rational person will see the utter bigotry in such a statement and not be inspired to violence against gays, it is not the rational person who would normally do violence. The problem is the irrational people who are easily influenced by respected leaders will be inspired to violence. Seattle area “Pastor” Ken Hutcherson was recently quoted as saying that if an effeminate man held the door open for him, he would rip his arm off and beat him with the bloody end. I didn’t hear any Christians speak out against this, even though it made the local newspapers and hit the internet blogs.
So, conservative Christians don’t restrain their words when it can incite violence against gays, but when it comes to preventing violence against gays, suddenly it’s wrong to single out a particular group. Do you see how your Christian witness is not judged as Christ-like, loving, or very inspiring? Do you see how the recipients of your “love” don’t regard it as such? Do you see how your silence in addressing the violence and hatred against us is only further evidence that you honestly, genuinely do not care? That by trying to diminish our efforts to speak out against the violence, you are, in fact, part of the problem.
Philip Yancey mentions how while Christians say they should love gays but also give them a message of judgment, only the latter is ever expressed. Until you actively, vocally, and specifically denounce violence against us, you cannot say you love us and expect us to believe you - especially when the violence done to us is often in the name of Jesus. Is that clear?
Nick - I am not speaking for all those people you mentioned and they do not speak for me.
PS - It doesn’t appear to me that Steve was belittling anyone
The DOS is a teachable moment, whether conservative Christians acknowledge it or not.
Gay kids are watching to see how “Christians” will behave. As are all the secular kids. And the Jewish kids. And the media. And the world.
So far, conservatice Christian leadership is confirming every bad stereotype that anyone has ever heard about intollerant hateful bigoted arrogant self-righteous jerks. So far, every response could have come straight from the old Church Lady skit on Saturday Night Live.
Warren, I think your solution fails in that it doesn’t address the concerns of the kids who are being bullied for being gay. They are asking for help. And we know, without question, that the Christ-based response is to heal the wounded and protect the vulnerable, regardless of how it effects the Culture War or whoever’s agenda.
But it certainly is more Christ-like than anything else I’ve heard from that branch of Christianity. And I really do like the idea, just not as some response to the Day of Silence.
I think the best choice would be for Christian kids (conservative or mainstream) to wear a cross on their lapel and join in silence for the day. And then at another time have a Golden Rule day. I think that a lot of kids would respect Christianity more if they though the Golden Rule was part of it rather then the opposite.
Warren, I never said they spoke for you. But I certainly hope you condemn what they say. You do, don’t you?
I do find Steve’s comments belittling. Gays and lesbians are often singled out for violence. Although singled out for violence, Steve is saying we shouldn’t single out gays and lesbians by highlighting the violence done to them for being who they are. The argument that you and he are putting forth is that instead of openly acknowledging and condemning violence against gays and lesbians, Christians should just say follow the Golden Rule. Do you see why that perspective belittles gays and lesbians?
On a day we use to highlight the violence done against us in an effort to prevent it, you advocate offering an alternative message. When several voices speak at once, their words become difficult to hear. The alternative message implies that you don’t want people to hear the first message - specifically that violence against gays and lesbians is wrong - otherwise you wouldn’t be speaking at the same time. Does that make sense? If not, consider Christmas. There are competing voices at Christmas-time over what the holiday means. Many conservative Christians are upset that their message is not being heard because of the competing voice that is raised. The second message drowns out the first, and Christians don’t like it. But, now, with the Day of Silence Christians are trying to drown out the first voice by offering an alternative. Ironically, the Christians are doing to others as they don’t like being done to themselves.
Nick - I do not offer an alternative message to respect for all people. The message offered in my suggestion is quite compatible. What about the Day of Silence conflicts with treating others the way you want to be treated? What I suggest allows Christian kids to respond in a way that respects their tradition and beliefs but also conveys respect for the lives of others.
Timothy - Baby steps, my friend. This would be the beginning of a dialogue which might not change minds regarding beliefs but I hope would support mutual respect.
Warren, how is speaking out against violence directed at gays and lesbians contrary to Christian tradition and beliefs? Is it that Christian tradition supports violence against gays and lesbians? Is it that Christian beliefs support violence against gays and lesbians? Please clarify.
Picture if you will, a room full of children with two adults. All the children are white kids with dark hair except for a black boy, an Asian girl, and a child from a very poor family.
Kids, being kids, eventually start picking on the different children: the red haired boy, the Asian girl, and the kid whose clothes are hand-me-downs.
One adult says, “Now, now children. We don’t pick on people. We like and respect poor kids and Asians.” The other adult says, “Black people are worse than terrorists, they are destroying our nation. God says so.”
It doesn’t take a Child Psychologist to know the result. The message is very very clear: don’t pick on anyone…. except the black kid.
Ooops, it should read
“Kids, being kids, eventually start picking on the different children: the black boy, the Asian girl, and the kid whose clothes are hand-me-downs.”
Warren,
Yes. I lose patience.
Baby steps are positive.
In answer to your question, allow me to use an analogy.
Let’s pretend that Christians were regularly murdered in this country for no reason other than their beliefs. Let’s pretend that they tried to get Congress to include them among other groups protected by hate-crime legislation: to declare that just as murdering a black man solely because he is black is motivated by hate, that murdering a Christian solely because he is Christian is also motivated by hate. Let’s pretend, for whatever bizarre reason, the “Americans for Tolerance” activist group is opposed to the inclusion of Christians in hate-crime legislation and fights it tooth and nail, saying that Christians shouldn’t receive special treatment because violence is wrong, no matter who it is against (ignoring that this Americans for Tolerance group’s members are protected by those very laws that exclude Christians). Then, let’s say, Christians and their allies decide to do some grass-roots activism by remaining silent on a particular day to highlight the violence done against them. Well, upon hearing this the Americans for Tolerance attempt to draw attention away from the violence done to Christians by proclaiming it “Be Nice to Your Neighbor” day. They’re not doing this after consulting with Christians to find out how they can best help; instead they’re doing it because they really don’t like people viewing Christianity as a legitimate religion. They fear that if people hear how Christians are persecuted, they might become sympathetic to what Christians have to say and maybe even accept them. Furthermore, when pressed on the issue Americans for Tolerance will not actually admit that Christians suffer unjust violence (perhaps because they think the violence is just), nor will they speak out against the violence against Christians, they’ll simply encourage people to be nice. And when the Christians complain about the competing message, the Americans for Tolerance simply say - how could you not want people to be nice?
Don’t you think Christians would be skeptical over the Americans for Tolerance group’s motivations? That the Americans for Tolerance actions contradict their message of being nice? That the very act of offering a second message for the same day is not, in fact, nice? That in reality the Americans for Tolerance are not so concerned about everyone being nice as they are simply trying to distract people from hearing what the Christians are saying? That if the Americans for Tolerance really wanted people to be nice, particularly to Christians, they would actually join forces in proclaiming that violence against Christians is wrong?
Does that help you understand why your suggestion just comes across completely contrary to what you are advocating? The reality seems to be that you do not want people to become sympathetic to the fact that gays and lesbians suffer considerable violence, because you fear they will become sympathetic to gays and lesbians in general. You are not working with the gay community to find ways to help prevent the violence, you are deliberately offering a second voice to drown out the first. As Timothy said above, if you were really all that concerned about wanting people to obey the Golden Rule, you’d pick any one of the other 364 days of the year to proclaim it (if not every day). But no, you pick the one specific day that gay and lesbian students are highlighting that they are often the victims of violence.
Michael,
To answer your question above: while this is a student led movement, principals can either be supportive or not. Some schools recognize that some students will participate that day without verbal communication. Other punish the students if they participate in the Day of Silence.
Warren,
It seems to me that Christian kids could be leading the way with a pledge to keep the Golden Rule.
I think this would be a wonderful thing!!! Far better than having some conservative Christians stayin home to boycott an event that is aimed at furthering tolerance and understanding.
staying - I meant staying!!!!!!!
LOL
Dr Throckmorton - and I’m sure it pains you to think of it - but many who profess Christianity are actually Pharisaic. To many, the bullying and violent suppression of overt sinners at schools is not a bug, it’s a desirable feature. A duty, even.
You don’t have to go very far on the net to find some of the more robust Christian groups seriously and rationally debating whether homosexuality should be a capital crime or not. These are not the Fred Phelps exhibitionists, they are far more widespread.
There are many places in the USA where pastors preach that the duty to suppress sin - especially at schools - outweighs Luke 6:31. And that that suppression includes punishing the unGodly, that it is a positive duty so to do.
A Psychologist will naturally recognise the pattern - of having one’s baser instincts given an “Ok” by higher authority which not just sanctions bloodlust, it makes it into a virtue.
Lest anyone think they’re immune to it, which of us have not felt at least a momentary urge to commit mayhem when we see a story about a paedophillic rape/murderer being let off on a legal technicality?
Many people think that Brandon David McInerney had the right idea - they just don’t say so unless amongst those of like minds. Your proposal, while a worthy one for demonstrating what we *should* do, will fall on stony ground with the majority of those who should be heeding it.
NARTH distanced itself from Mr Berger’s comments, seeing the danger. And I’m certain Mr Berger did not intend “disapproval” to extend to execution. Perhaps a few broken bones though. Because that’s what usually happens.
Warren–
I love the idea of a healthy Christian response rather than the negative statement of staying home. Always analytical, I was envisioning the Christian student trying to guesstimate how many cards he’ll need.
That led me to think: how could we get the Christian kids down to just one card too. Which led to: what if the Christian kids could actually join in the day of silence with their own cards with the message you described and a strong anti-bullying statement.
Warren,
It seems to me that Christian kids could be leading the way with a pledge to keep the Golden Rule.
I know that you didn’t mean anything by saying this - and perhaps you even thought that this was implied in what you said, but this is something I talked to Wendy Gritter about on another blog - when you say Christian kids, it almost sounds like you’re suggesting that some of the gay students aren’t Christians. It might be better to talk about some conservative Christian kids as non-gay-affirming Christians. Just a suggestion you can take or leave
is this exercise limited to Christian kids or would it be a good idea to include ALL children, regardless of their religion, to demonstrate their ability to denounce any verbal or physical abuse on others? I think the golden rule is accepted by most people as a good thing and not exclusive to only a certain group of people. That is probably why there is so much contention to begin with.
Ann,
is this exercise limited to Christian kids or would it be a good idea to include ALL children, regardless of their religion, to demonstrate their ability to denounce any verbal or physical abuse on others?
I don’t know a great deal about the Day of Silence, but I think that was its original intent - its my understanding that no one is excluded from participating
Its my understanding from the definitions we’ve given that Identity is something that is chosen whereas Orientation is not.
Then why is the description “Christian” used in posts when talking about this? Isn’t everyone capable of doing the right thing or is it just limited to those with this particular belief? I would hope we would encourage everyone to do the right thing and from that any current divide will be diminished. As long as we are catagorizing who is what, and who can and cannot do what, that is where the emphasis will be. Just makes my hair hurt!
If we could get to the parents and the kids who are responding by staying home and persuade them to accept the response we’re discussing, then I don’t care much what we call it. Wouldn’t it be great to see a news story featuring a Christian student giving an anti-bullying statement?
I am so sorry - this is the phrase I wanted to comment on. The other one is from another thread. Please ignore #92589.
I don’t know a great deal about the Day of Silence, but I think that was its original intent - its my understanding that no one is excluded from participating
Then why is the description “Christian” used in posts when talking about this? Isn’t everyone capable of doing the right thing or is it just limited to those with this particular belief? I would hope we would encourage everyone to do the right thing and from that any current divide will be diminished. As long as we are catagorizing who is what, and who can and cannot do what, that is where the emphasis will be. Just makes my hair hurt!
Wouldn’t it be great to see a news story featuring a Christian student giving an anti-bullying statement?
I’ve heard Christian (gay and straight) students make anti-bullying pronouncements
But to answer your question - YES, it would be nice Eddy to see that in the news more
Can all the students who want to participate come up with an agreed upon message they would like to put on the cards that are passed out? If the verse in Luke is suggested, it would probably be agreed upon by all. The difference is that it would be their idea which would have much more meaning and impact in how it is sustained in the future.
Ann,
Everyone - gay, straight, black, white, Christian, heathen, or funny looking girl who only eats tater tots - is welcome to participate. And they have already come up with an agreed upon message:
Only those who do not approve of this message are trying to change it.
Of course –it’s a great idea! Just as I would want others to speak the truth in love to me, I will try to speak the truth in love with those beset by silence, and I will share the unconditional, forgiving love of God in Christ who warns us that homosexual behavior is addictive, unfulfilling, heartbreaking, spiritually deadening, and ultimately destructive of individuals, relationships, families, nations, and civilizations. Rather, God wants us to live according to His Will, which is clearly revealed in scripture. He promises blessing upon those who do so, and multitudes of former homosexuals attest to this.
“For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.” (John 3:17)
Rather, God wants us to live according to His Will, which is clearly revealed in scripture. He promises blessing upon those who do so, and multitudes of former homosexuals attest to this.
Dave,
These are very refreshing and encouraging words - not sure how others will respond but I want you to know how much I appreciate them for myself.
Dave,
Praise God for the opportunity to share some truth in love with you.
The unconditional, forgiving love of God in Christ who warns us that lying about others is a sin and is abhorent to God’s presence. Fotunately, through the grace of Christ’s sacrifice you can seek forgiveness from God for your untruthful tyrade and then show your humilty by seeking forgiveness from those whom you have maligned.
There is nothing whatsoever to support your untruthful claim that homosexual behavior is addictive, unfulfilling, heartbreaking, spiritually deadening, and ultimately destructive of individuals, relationships, families, nations, and or civilizations. Nor are there “multitudes” of “former homosexuals” to attest to this. Frankly, there aren’t more than a few thousand trying at any given time and most of those (at least 85%) wouldn’t consider themselves to be heterosexual.
To make such a claim shows a deep misunderstanding of not only sexuality and gay persons but also illustrate a willingness to repeat evil about others. Surely such a vile desire to spread hateful gossip can only come from Satan.
But again, I thank God that the amazing and wonderful Good News of Christ can be shared with you. If you show a truly repentant heart God will forgive you. I you allow Him to, God will remove your desire to lie and do evil with a desire to do good to those around you.
Steve (in post #92396) made the assertion that the Day of Silence was “for the benefit of gay students above anyone else.”
Really? Wouldn’t the end of antigay hatred, bullying and violence against gays benefit everyone?
P.S. to Steve: You said you liked Warren’s suggestion because “it is not aimed toward anyone in particular but everyone in general.”
But you see, Steve, that’s the problem! The hatred, bullying and violence is not aimed at “everyone is general”, but at kids who are seen as different and hate-worthy – simply because they might be gay. It’s “in particular“, not “everyone in general.” ”
“In general”, kids seem to know they probably shouldn’t mistreat kids like them. Unfortunately, many kids somehow get a get a different impression about kids who are different. For example, as a school kid, I was singled out “in particular” and regularly teased, kicked, beaten and spat upon because they saw me as “homo” or “queer”. It wasn’t “everyone in general”>. It was me (and kids like me) “in particular”
As an adult, I was fired from two jobs, not for poor performance, but singled out “in partcicular” because the bosses didn’t want a gay guy spoiling their conservative Orange County image. Before protective legislation, there was nothing I could do. It wasn’t “everyone in general“. Employers had the legal right to fire me, “in particular“.
Serveral years ago, I was beaten and stabbed, without provocation, in a parking behind a gay tavern in my hometown. My best friend, Jeffery Owens, was also kicked and beaten. Our attackers, a group composed mainly of teenagers, singled us out ‘In particular”, yelling “fag” as they repeatedly attacked us. Jeffery took five stab wounds in his back — and bled to death on an operating table. How did those kids learn that such beavior was “macho” or “ok”? Could they have learned it at home — or on the playground?
Sometimes, a society needs to bring special attention, in particular, to those groups that are being singled out for mistreatment and violence. — reaffirming that basic principle of democracy that no particular group should be the target of hatred or injustice. That’s what the Civil Right movement was about — and it benefited everyone.
Even though Warren probably hasn’t logged on to this since yesterday, based on the comments of others I thought I would restate my questions to Warren:
How is speaking out against violence directed at gays and lesbians contrary to Christian tradition and beliefs?
Is it that Christian tradition supports violence against gays and lesbians?
Is it that Christian beliefs support violence against gays and lesbians?
Please clarify.
Steve takes the approach that one should just ignore the violence done to gays in order to preach to them (even though the gays receiving the violence are already Christian, and those like myself endured well over 10 years of ex-gay therapy, remaining celibate before therapy and throughout therapy, praying and crying on a regularly basis thinking God had abandoned or rejected me because the desires were not going away). You see Steve, your words do not make an impact because your basic assumptions about homosexuality are flawed and dishonest.
* that should be “some of the gays receiving the violence are already Christian”. My apologies. I just get upset when I see such ignorance being promoted.
I agree that gays are a group that gets singled out for bullying but I strongly disagree that they are the only group needing protection from bullies. Anyone who is different is susceptible to bullying. Christians, the drama group, the debate geeks, hippies, Teenage girls are capable of horrific bullying–and suspected sexual orientation isn’t often a factor. Ethnic groups are now, not only the targets of the bullying, but in places where they have a substantial presence, they have begun bullying of their own. I support statements that speak to all bullying.
Michael–
Re the Orange County firings, was this the stated reason for the firings? If not, how were you able to uncover these motivations? What were the manufactured reasons, if any?
What was the frequency of the regular kicks, beatings and spitting? Daily, weekly, monthly, several times a year? I was bullied frequently in high school but only one time can I recall a blow; their tactic was more intimidation than actual physical violence. But it was nonetheless effective. I dreaded the bus ride to and from school and strategized my exit from the bus so as not to draw the attention of the bullies and/or to be travelling in a pack.
Eddy - at the risk of being accused of engaging in competitive victimology… an accusation with some justice behind it…
Let’s look at some metrics.
How many times were you strangled to the point of unconsciousness?
How many skull fractures do X-rays show you endured before age 10?
How many cigarettes were stubbed out on you?
How many times were you raped?
How many times had you had bones broken, then were deliberately kicked on the site of the break a week later?
Of that list, I wasn’t raped. I was lucky that the bus conductor (remember them?) found me before I’d been unconscious too long, and loosened the garotte around my neck.
The one blow I do not recall is when I was hit with a crowbar at age 9. I remember seeing it coming out of the corner of my eye, then remember the feeling of the ground pressing my back.
My experience is all too typical of transsexual children, even ones who don’t appear overly effeminate or overly tomboyish. We “smell funny”, we “vibe wrong”. Our cross-gendered neurology means that many of us have our mannerisms setting off alarm bells. We don’t *think* like other kids who look like us. That’s why I identify more as transsexual than as the more medically precise Intersexed.
But remember, my childhood days were 40 years ago. Things might be better now.
Overt gays don’t have it as bad, but they have it bad enough. I dimly recall that the stats say about a quarter get seriously injured, and some 60% experience significant bullying of the kind you describe. We don’t know how many die in “tragic accidents”, pushed under vehicles, or falling from heights, or trapped in burning buildings while “playing”.
The most dangerous time for gays appears to be in high school, the most dangerous time for transsexuals in grade school, before puberty. 10-12 year olds don’t have the strength of 16-18 year olds, but they don’t have the moral development or anticipation of consequences either. By high school, TS kids have learnt survival skills - running, having a protector, or hiding in with the nerds and other outcasts.
The one really good piece of science we have on the subject was a survey conducted by the Scottish Office on gender-variant children in Northern Ireland. That showed that 50% of transsexual children had self-harmed before age 20. The figures for gays were almost exactly half that.
I don’t think even 10% of the nerds of your acquaintance made suicide attempts.
That there is a huge problem with “nerds” being victimised by “jocks” is indisputed. It needs addressing. But merely being a nerd is something most transsexual kids could only aspire to. Being beaten, but not stoned with bricks. Having bruises, not fractures.
Zoe-
You are correct that you’ve been victimized more than I. But I have twice been beaten in situations where I feared for my life. Beyond that I’ve been assaulted/mugged approximately a dozen times. My small stature tends to be a magnet for adult bullying.
My questions to MIchael went more to comparing the difference in bullying from one region of the country to another. I thought the bullying I received really sucked but your attacks and Michael’s were both more frequent and more brutal. I hadn’t really given it much thought but I’m also thinking that having six brothers spared me more brutality than I would have gotten otherwise. One of them tells the story of a friend who wanted permission to ‘beat the hippie/peacefreak’ out of me. My brother told him to back off saying: “besides that’s our job.” Another brother was a gay basher; the people who beat me in the one incident cited above were likely friends of his. At home, he would elbow me sharply in the ribs several times most days. Still, though, not the severity you experienced.
Eddt asked: “was this the stated reason for the firings? If not, how were you able to uncover these motivations? What were the manufactured reasons, if any? What was the frequency of the regular kicks, beatings and spitting? Daily, weekly, monthly, several times a year?
Yes, in both firings, the bosses told me they were letting me go only because I was gay. One told me she was worried that large (conservative) donors would stop giviing money if they found out they had a “homosexual on staff”. The second boss took me aside one day and told me “never hire a gay or a Jew”. I’m not Jewish, but when he found out I was gay, I was toast.
In terms of the schoolyard beatings and harrassment — daily or almost daily — to the extent that I dreaded every recess. I never suggested that gays were the “only group needing protection from bullies”. But I sure could have used some.
Eddy, I’m sorry that you were given such a rough time. No child should go through that kind of thing.
And honesty compels me to say that in comparison with virtually every TS person of my generation I’ve talked to, I had it easy.
You see, unlike you, I wasn’t gracile or petite. I was built like a linebacker, which was a really horrible situation for any young girl to be in. Still, it made accepting my lot in life easier, and I never “dressed” or anything. The phrase “putting lipstick on a pig” was all too appropriate. When there is no choice, “doing the boy act”, pretending to be male and even striving to be the best Man any girl can be is easier. I was a Tomboy too, I liked a lot of Boy Stuff. Remember, this was the 60s, and traditional female roles were far more confining than now.
It had other advantages too. I could give as good as I got and make others afraid to attack - except in packs. At 8 I was larger than most 10 year olds. I fought dirty too, none of this silly boy-pecking-order stuff. I wasn’t interested in establishing hierarchies of male dominance. Like most girls my age, I considered the whole thing rather puerile. Girls that age can be rather priggish.
However, it meant i became brutalised, even feral. When cornered, I bit, I scratched, and whenever I caught a gang member alone afterwards, I attacked without mercy. I’m sorry to say that I deliberately broke one boy’s collarbone, just so he’d stop hurting me. Not to cause pain, or in revenge, or to “teach him a lesson”, but so he wouldn’t have the capability. Coldly Pre-meditated. I’m glad my mother came in on me unexpectedly shortly thereafter when I was taking a bath, and freaked out at the way my body was just one big bruise under my clothing. I got put in a different school, and so regained my humanity. My victim was only 10. OK, I was 8, but he was no monster, he was just a normal 10 year old boy “fitting in”, socialising with other little boys. I wish I could apologise to him.
In another way I was lucky too. My parents were loving. I couldn’t tell them of course about my secret. I figured that when I hit my teens and turned into the ugliest girl in town that they’d have enough on their plate. I just naturally assumed that that’s what would happen, and I could wait patiently until it did. Meanwhile, my Father was no distant figure, but someone I rather hero-worshipped, not exactly an Electra complex, but not far off. I wanted to be like him, even though I was a girl. But I digress.
Your comment about “beating the hippie/peacefreak” out of you resonates though, not with me, but with all too many cases where parents took it upon themselves to “beat the gay out”. It happens so often, it’s almost a cliche.
The TS version is darker, and I’ve heard it more than once from others. A Father (in one case an older brother) says “So you think you’re a girl? I’ll show you what it’s like for girls, that will change your mind! Bend over, Bitch….”
I am so, so, so very sick of trying to mend broken spirits. This didn’t happen to me, nothing like it did, I was lucky, but even second-hand and after over thirty years, it wrenches my soul.
That’s why, try as I might, I can’t be as dispassionate and objective as I’d like to be, even as I need to be, when discussing the bullying of gay and TS kids. I had it easy compared to many, but it was hellish enough. Well, no more, I won’t see other children put through that if I can help it.
- http://www.dayofsilence.org
- Buddy Smith of the American Family Association, quoted at http://www.missionamerica.com
Father forgive them, for they know not what they do. I know that Buddy Smith is acting out of the same concern for children that I am, you see.
Michael-
Thanks for answering so candidly. In my recollections above I was thinking 9th grade through 12th. Your mention of recess triggered my memories of hiding in a locker at lunchtime recess in order to let 3 of my picked on friends back inside the building. My male friend and I both experimented from puberty on but didn’t officially ‘come out’ until our first year of college. But we were getting picked on, pushed around, tripped, knocked down from as early as the second grade. Anyway, the bullying did increase around age 11, none of us were really thinking in terms of sexual though; the bullying was simply because we were different. Once everyone got on board with puberty, then the bullying took on the anti-gay/fag/homo but, prior to that, it was a response to our ‘being different’.
Zoe,
I really wish we could spend the afternoon together - you are the kind of person I would like to have as a friend.
Zoe-
I dont like his message either.
After many conversations with Jag, I had a very profound thought - one that made so much sense to me that it seemed like the answer to much of the contention. I am sure others have had this same thought, I was just a little slow in “getting it”. If the issues presented (protection, marriage, etc.) were based on “equal rights” rather than “moral acceptance”, I really think much of the existing resistance would go away. Unfortunately, those people who resist are doing so based on this - “if I agree to this then it means I accept all the components of the people involved and I cannot do this because it is not my moral code”. They personalize it and cannot separate doing the right thing based on protection and equal rights from morally accepting every component of the people involved. If they feel forced by others, it only makes it worse. I may be over-simplifying things but I get lost in long explanations
I really like the idea of re-assurance between students and if this day can bring that based on the equal rights (the right thing to do) aspect of it rather than equate it to personal moral acceptance of the myriad of issues of homosexuality, I think it would be a wonderful example to many of the adults who hold out on equal rights because they are confusing or enmeshing them with personal moral acceptance of the other issues.
I am a person, I hope can lend a little bit more of an expansion on what Michael Bussee and Nick R have written.
Warren, although your idea is well meaning, it will fall somewhat short of the intent of Day of Silence. It’s not directed specifically at Christians. However, Christian students have been encouraged to exclusively target their gay classmates with Day of Truth.
The issue of what is moral or a sin in the belief system of Christians, takes on a specificity with homosexuality it does not with say, adultery, divorce, gluttony or the abuse of another person.
Let me for example bring up Shoah. Shoah is “Day of Rememberance” it is specific to the event called “Kristalnacht” when thousands of Jewish establishments were destroyed in the most violent orgy known during the Holocaust and hundreds and hundreds of Jews were murdered or arrested and sent straight into slavery or execution camps.
Now, if there were students influence by Holocaust denier, anti Semites or some othe organization that wanted them to express it on SHOAH, then that tactic in itself would be rude and specific for offending the purpose of that day to begin with.
Forgetting, sugar coating or diluting in any way the facts regarding the violence and threat against gays and lesbians doesn’t commit fully to the history that this groups actually has with Christianity.
Christians can show their solidarity with gay students AND the Golden Rule every OTHER day of the year. And should do that.
The brutality of the Holocaust is real. And I was taught about that, and shown the pictures and how segregationists lynched blacks when I was young.
I know a lot of young people can handle it. And would appreciate the adults standing up and being honest about just how bad these issues are. Sometimes that’s where you have to go for a high schooler to appreciate the impact of hate in our society.
DOS is as specific as Shoah. It’s not YOUR time, it’s that of gay students and the fear and silence and threat they live with.
Christian consciousness created this situation, and Christian consciousness is going to have to do a lot more than what you propose on ONE day.
It’s about every day after that’ll count a lot more.
I agree that we should speak out against bullying of all kinds - but we do do that to some extent already. Sometimes the situation calls for us to bring to everyone’s attentions those groups that receive a great deal of bullying, and even extreme forms of bullying. When individual groups that are the victims step up to do this, I don’t think we need to criticize them by saying: Yeah, but……. If you agree that all forms of bullying should be stopped then step up, be loud about it, and say something - and speak about those groups that are often at the receiving hands of extreme forms of bullying - sure some people called geeks are given “swirly’s” or wedgies, but gay people are KILLED for being who they are - and these kinds of things need to be talked about.
Let’s acknowledge that all bullying needs to stop, without pretending that all groups receive the same kind or type of bullying - and be willing to talk about and help these groups without boycotting their attempts to bring it to the public’s attention. If you really care about bullying stand up to it, say something, don’t stay at home.
Hi Ann!
If you’re ever in the vicinity of Canberra, Australia, I hope we can meet. I was touched by your kind words of friendship, and return the sentiment exactly. You’re my kind of people.
You raise a good point - on one side, you have people who another group disapproves of on moral grounds. They make no distinction between disapproving of their supposed behaviour, and disapproving of their existence. They feel threatened by them, that all they hold good and right is being attacked by them. They believe that even their children are being attacked, that their souls are being put in peril.
On the other side, there are those who believe that their feelings are either natural and moral, or sinful but both harmless and something they’re born as. And who also feel attacked, not in some metaphysical sense, but in terms of broken bones and a trail of corpses. Even the corpses of slaughtered children.
The latter is asking that their injuries be acknowledged, and the danger reduced.
The former… it’s difficult to see exactly what they want. They send conflicting messages, not exactly approving of the massacre of innocents, but not being terribly concerned about the physical welfare of sinners who are their enemies. Even ones 6 years old. The profess Christian Love, but want to save their enemies’ souls, not their bodies, from harm. Pharisees. Hypocrites.
That does some of them an injustice though: there are many parts of “traditional morality” that are essential for spiritual health. The 10 commandments are a pretty good basis for moral behaviour. Even Atheists try to obey 9 of them, anyway. We jettison them at our own risk. Many are neither hypocritical or pharisaic, they’re just afraid that their moral structure is under attack on so many fronts - and I can’t say I entirely disagree there - that they can’t give an inch, or dire consequences will result.
But “traditional morality” at the moment at least tolerates the bullying of the gender- or sexually- non-conforming, and in extreme cases, actively rather than passively encourages it. Just as it tolerated the ownership of slaves, the political oppression of women, and a host of sins in the past.
But that proves that “traditional morality” can withstand change. One can disapprove of extra-marital sex, and yet not condemn unmarried mothers - and their children - to lives of poverty and pariah-hood, as was the case even within my lifetime. It’s possible to register disapproval of sin, without casting stones at the sinners.
Dr Throckmorton’s proposed solution seems to me to be flawed in two ways. First, it’s a band-aid on a gangrenous wound. It preserves the status quo, when reform is needed. Second, it unwittingly denies the problem, that the bullying of gays, transsexuals and the intersexed at school is so much worse than for other groups that it differs not just in degree, but in kind. I think the evidence supports that thesis.
Evangelical Christians suffer some persecution for their beliefs. But I can think of no examples in recent memory where an Evangelical Christian child was martyred at school, executed by gunshots to the head, for being who they are. Not in the USA anyway. There’s a difference.
If Samaritans or lepers werre being singled out for mistreatment, I bet Jesus would have done or said something…
Michael - He did do something - He used Samaritans and lepers and tax collectors, etc as illustrations of general principles of reconciliation and redemption. The Golden Rule is a general principle that would be, IMO, a more inclusive principle.
Regan - The DOS is somewhat different from the example you gave in that DOS does target attitude and belief change - or at least it has in the past. Past manuals supporting (2005) the DOS have referred to the DOS as gay rights event. The current handbook describes past DOS as gay rights events. The SHOAH is a remembrance of a historical event, the DOS is not. Would you approve a school activity of pro-life students being silent all day long to call attention to abortion? I say this not knowing if there is such an event, but I just wonder how many days can be observed.
I want to state that I do not see the DOS or No Name Calling week as being the issues I used to. I still am skeptical that the singular reason for these events is ending violence, but these days have come and gone, and the world keeps on spinning. I am likewise skeptical that keeping kids out of school teaches much of spiritual significance. My suggestion is made knowing that it will not likely catch on, but hoping to express an alternative for those who are disposed to engage rather than disengage.
Indeed Zoe…Christians are not persecuted. There are Christians who only because of loud and inappropriate verbal assualt in a public square or in some other place they’re illegally provacative (and know it), they are removed forcibly.
This is not persecution because they are Christian. This is removing a provocative presence from a vulnerable target. Anyone behaving that way would get the same treatment by authorities. And being inconvenienced for NOT speaking in such an imposing way, is very different from being threatened outright for simply existing and going about one’s legal business.
It wouldn’t kill Christians to restrain themselves on this issue. But it CAN kill a child when they don’t.
In a way, there is a determined cowardice to place oneself in the position of being removed or having your statement removed from your person. Such as in the case of a high school boy that wore anti gay statements on his t-shirt in response to the Day of Silence. He was encouraged to do so by Christians for the precise reason of being sent to the principle’s office and garnering publicity for the Alliance Defense Fund, the legal entitity that defends the Day of Truth counterprotest.
The reason I say cowardice is the specificity and the way they target ONLY gay people for example.
Their Christian conviction for example doesn’t extend to picketing or protesting divorce courts or divorce lawyers. They don’t use this device to assail known adulterers or detention centers where thieves and other criminals are housed.
No, they save their invective almost exclusively for gay people and get offended when gay people defend themselves or challenge them on what they do.
The ADF is looking for gay baiters and they find them, sure enough. Using children to do so I find especially reprehensible. Poising the next generation to assault gay children. And what’s even sadder….the Christian children who do this, are unprepared in a positive way for having gay children of their own.
And either way, they and their gay child are both betrayed in the end and the Christians who did it, wouldn’t ( and don’t ) have the courage to admit it.
Warren, DOS does commemorate those who were murdered by anti gay hate. There are sometimes vigils and other meetings in that regard. You’re right, it’s about attitude change.
But if the impact of NOT changing isn’t also illustrated, then the DOS motive isn’t clear.
It’s as legitimate as Shoah for that reason. Gays and lesbians were also victims of the Nazi regime.
The DOS is done in different ways from school to school.
As for injecting the abortion issue into it, THAT isn’t the same issue. Abortion is personal, private and the loss anonymous.
Abortion can be spontaneous, therapeutic or not. And none of us knows which it is when it happens to a female. And abortions don’t happen BECAUSE of hate. Or deliberate insitutional bias in the law against children or the unborn.
Gays and lesbians are a specific target for a specific reason by specific language and terms.
See?
Regan,
Are you sure about Christians not being persecuted? It is my understanding that it rarely happens in this country but it does happen in other countries around the world. The International Foundation of Christians and Jews, among other organizations, are involved in rescuing those who are being persecuted and offering their help in other ways to prevent or alleviate it as much as possible.
Abortion is personal, private and the loss anonymous.
Regan,
Please help me understand how can you give such credibility to the loss of one child and then say another child’s death has no meaning because it is personal, private and anonymous?
The brutality against gays and lesbians cannot be soft pedaled by ‘no name calling week’ or the like. Dr. T.
It’s inappropriate. FROM the colonials executing gays in aboriginal cultures to the Nazis to virtual lynchings by mobs or law enforcers…the historical record is there and it can be a part of it that institutionalized hate and discrimination contributes to the violence TO THIS DAY.
Young people have a way seeing their world in personal relativism. If they’ve never witnessed racism or know it personally, the brutality of Jim Crow or the biggest terrorist organization in American, the Ku Klux Klan won’t make an impression on them and their place in really making hate a thing of the past.
They not only can bear witness to what makes whole governments and it’s supporters go along with how they treat minorities or aboriginals (Trail of Tears) for example, children won’t feel like they can actually participate in changing history. But simply seeing it as in the past and beyond them and their concerns.
The ex gay industry and the anti gay in a way foster this attitude that homosexuals are responsible for the bias against them. And the simplistic idea that if gay people were the ones that changed, then again….the brutality against those who don’t is entirely their fault. Gay people have had all this time and opportunity to change after all or hide and not take such punishment.
They why don’t Jews change? Why are they constantly under seige, they don’t have to be Jews. They can hide it. Otherwise they wouldn’t be blown up in Israel and the Nazis wouldn’t have gotten them.
Gays and lesbians have been a part of humankind since BEFORE religions were established. The prehistory of homosexuality is ignored and the dominant culture isn’t even taught that gay people have and do contribute much of merit to society.
This makes it that much easier to dismiss them altogether.
To encourage young people to be the generation that DOESN’T casually persecute gay people or expect them to be the ones to change (since they’ve been around for so long), then this prepares them to take having their own gay children, friends, colleagues and such in stride.
It’s not just about tolerating their gay peers but also learning about gay people’s place in our entire history as human beings.
I’m not into pretending otherwise. It’s obviously wrong and unhealthy to gay/straight relations to withold or pretend that being a committed EX sexual or post gay person proves something positive for the image and history of homosexuals and homosexuality.
It doesn’t serve progress to be right where the dominant culture historically has always wanted gay people.
Warren I agree that the “Golden Rule is a general princicple , a more inclusive principle…” It would be great if everyone understood that and lived by it.
But sometimes, just to make sure everyone understands that the Golden Rule applies to everybody, you have to point out the specific groups that are being, or have been, singled out for mistreatment. You have to say, “See this leper? The Golden Rule aplies to him too.” “See this Samaritan? Him too.” “This tax-collector? This gay person? Yep, them too.”
The freedoms we enjoy in the USA apply to all of us, and yet we have had periods in our history when excluding certain groups was par-for-the-course — generally accepted as “right” or “OK”. You mean, slaves should be free? Yes, them too. Women whould have the vote? Yes, them too.
Sometimes, due to the history and extent of the persecution and exclusion, you have to spell it out specifically. I think that’s what the Day of Silence is about. It would be nice if gays were no longer specific targets. Until then, we have to spell it out.
Ann, I wouldn’t and couldn’t and DIDN’T say that the loss of a child by abortion hasn’t the same credibility or meaning.
It’s a different issue. I was answering Dr. T’s suggestion.
The loss of ANY child is devastating. And deliberately is a terrible thought to me.
But let’s keep things in perspective.
Ann, I work for the Los Angeles Police Dept as a forensic photographer.
And to be very frank with you, Ann. Our society likes to pretend it loves it’s children and can take care of all them fully and competently.
Well…it doesn’t.
And we don’t deserve our children if what I see every day keeps happening.
I’m one of those people who has a very tough and sometimes dangerous job. i am confronted with realities that most people only know superficially. Even America is not as safe and understanding a place we root for it to be. Well meaning isn’t the same as being well.
I might seem pessimisstic, but I’m not. That’s why I work so hard to support and advocate for the young. But I see them being sold out, sold and destroyed by their own parents, and the results are the street violence, domestic violence and squalor that I’m glad YOU don’t have to see.
But births exceed our society’s ability to do right by it’s children. And if there is a woman out there that doesn’t trust us, the father or any one else she knows to give that child life, well…that’s on us too.
She’s got eyes…and if she sees nothing in herself or us and we can’t show otherwise, then what do you think we should do Ann?
The risks are ALL hers, not ours. And it’s who takes the risks who have to make that ultimate decision, however reprehensible it is to us.
And who are we to decide HER sacrifice is worthy, when WE aren’t prepared to make any of our own.
cont.
The subject here is the objection or suggestion by Throckmorton on how a Christian should respond to DOS, not abortion. And HE brought it up.
So don’t read something into what I DIDN’T say and pass judgement as if I accept abortion when I dont.
But I also don’t accept that our society is as civilized as it thinks it is.
you have to point out the specific groups that are being, or have been, singled out for mistreatment.
Michael,
Would you be willing to extend this (the Golden Rule) to the thousands of pre-born children who die every year at the hand of another? Do they deserve the same protection of their life that you say others do?
and the results are the street violence, domestic violence and squalor that I’m glad YOU don’t have to see.
Regan,
Please tell me how you can make this assumption about me?
Day of Silence is a distraction and as such should be abolished from schools (during school hours anyway). It has no place in the tax payer arnea of teaching children how to add and write. Small interest group affairs should remain private.
Hi Ann, I am sure about that in America, however I DO know that Christians ARE persecuted, even killed in other countries.
Some of them are missionaries and others are nationals of their country. The Fulan Gong for example, in China are Chinese nationals.
I know that Christians have been jailed in countries like Pakistan or Indonesia where Muslims dominate society.
But here in America that’s not an issue in the ways SOME Christians or at least virulent anti gay groups want to portray.
Matt Barber who writes and is a spokesperson for Concerned Women for AMerica recent wrote that OK State Rep. Sally Kern was receiving threats from “anti Christains homosexual hate organizations.”
Sally Kern recently was recorded making extremely homophobic remarks in her office.
And it’s been publicized widely.
Now what Matt Barber said was not only MORE inflammatory but it was DANGEROUS.
I know for a fact there ARE no anti Christian homosexual hate groups. If there were, the Simon Weisenthal Center would be onto it. And if they really thought so, then they could have that organization research it and track it down for him.
But his behavior was a if Sally Kern was some poor innocent in this mess and that her words were factual and she was being targeted for no reason but speaking the truth.
Again, simple minded reflective cowardice of people who open the door, then want to duck for cover when accoutability shows up for it’s due.
Personally, if the Alliance Defense Fund and Concerned Women for America are about defending Christians and their persecutors. I’m sure the Fulan Gong and those Christians in jail in Indonesia would benefit from them going OVER THERE and doing what their mission says.
Then I’d be impressed.
But trying to damage the civil rights of gay citizens then whining about it when they don’t get to do it, is more of the cowardice I’m talking about.
So don’t read something into what I DIDN’T say and pass judgement as if I accept abortion when I dont.
Regan,
This is another assumption you made about me. I observed what you wrote and inquired about the thought process so I would understand it. Please don’t jump to conclusions about me.
Okay Ann, sometimes assumptions invoke the same. If I’m wrong, then please, enlighten me. Are you a first responder too?
Ann: Since people have labeled me a “gay activist” and most people think they know what gay actvists believe or want (you know — our “agenda”), you may be surprised to hear this, but I am not in favor of abortion. I think it’s tragic. All human life is precious and deserves protection — it is the “how” that we might disagree on — not the principle.
You may also be surprised to hear that I am not in favor of gay marriage. Hey, I don’t even think that straight marriage ought to be governed by the state. I think “marriage” should be a very personal/spritual/family sort of thing. That being said, I think everyone should have the right to form a civil union if they want to protect themselves legally.
I know for a fact there ARE no anti Christian homosexual hate groups.
Regan,
Have you read anything on this blog from individuals who are? I have.
If I’m wrong, then please, enlighten me. Are you a first responder too?
Regan,
I believe I have responded over 800 times now on this blog. We have probably crossed paths with the kind of work you are involved in. I am extremely familiar with the things you write about.
Michael,
Actually I am not surprised at all. With the exception of attacking Alan’s personal family life, I have found you you to have exceptional intelligence, fairness, integrity, and have learned a lot from you. I didn’t even know you were an activist.
Regan,
I am really not familiar with those groups or organizations you referred to - only the Simon Weisenthal Center.
Well I”m at a disadvantage. I don’t know who you are. And have no way of knowing how familiar you are with what I write. That still doesn’t tell me anything.
You did pass judgement on me before the other way around and made an assumption of your own.
And went WAY off topic to make sure of that.
No Ann, I haven’t read this blog before. And I’m not surprised if there are any anti Christian gay individuals. Christians are inherently anti gay, although homosexuals have been around since before that religion.
But an individual isn’t an organization, it’s a single person. And no homosexuals are organized to deprive Christians of their ability to be Christian or their rights as citizens. Just their ability to deprive gay people of everything else.
Know the difference between and action and REaction.
And as has been pointed out by Zoe….no gay child on record has assaulted a Christian in their school, nor verbally abused them with the tacit approval of the school or community.
http://www.cwa.org
http://www.frc.org
There are organizations that advocate for the rights and freedoms of gays and lesbians.
That’s not anti Christian. Many gays and lesbians ARE Christians.
There is a difference between being pro gay, but not anti Christian.
But to some Christians that’s one and the same.
Sort of like the way gay people get judged as just as dangerous as murderers and thieves.
Gay people don’t seem to be having as big a perception problem and persecution complex as some religious people who about who is indoctinating who and who is persecuting who.
oops, wrong link. It’s for Christian World Adoption.
Concerned Women for America has Matt Barber write for TownHall. maybe you can get the link there.
There are anti-Christian individuals of various sexual orientations. There are, to my knowledge, no anti-Christian homosexual hate groups.
There are many anti-gay Christian hate groups. They tend to say “we don’t hate the homosexual” but their actions are pretty clear.
Ann, my dear….a first responder is a police officer, emergency medical tech and firefighter. Forensic photographers have to respond to incidents to preserve the evidence for the second team of criminalists.
I appreciate you responding to this blog 800 times. But first responder is an emergency response term.
I just realized you might not have understood me. You made me smile though.
There is a difference between being pro gay, but not anti Christian.
But to some Christians that’s one and the same.
Regan,
Again, I am very familiar with this.
Ann: Thanks for the compliments about my intelligence, fairness and integrity. I could use a boost today — not feeling very smart — forgot to wear green to work on St. Patty’s Day! As for beiing an “activist” — that’s just what EXODUS likes to call me. I don’t really like it since I am not a member of any group except my church and my choir. I don’t really like the label since I just see myself as an individual Christian, gay man who is trying to be truthful about my own experience — and trying to keep EXODUS honest while I’m at it.
You commented that I am “attacking Alan’s personal family life,” Not so. Or at least, I don’t mean to. He seem to be a loving husband and devoted father. I genuinely wish him well. It’s not easy for any man — especially one who continues to struggle with gay feelings — which Alan admits he does. I have been there. I know.
I am not challenging Alan’s personal family life — I am challenging his confusing (and in my opinion) less-than-completely-honest use of language, his contradictory statements on EXODUS policy matters and (what seems to me) his reluctance to really keep the public promises he makes.
As for his personal life, I think it is wonderful that Alan has been able to find enough “change” to make his marriage work. I envy him. For his sake, his wife’s sake and especially for the sake of his children, I earnestly pray that he succeeds.
I just realized you might not have understood me. You made me smile though.
Regan,
I am sorry I misunderstood the term “first responder” - thank you for clairfying. On a professional level, I am on a first responder.
On a professional level, I am on a first responder.
Sorry again! It should have said “I am not a first responder”.
okay, cool, Ann
It’s illegal to be indoors on such a beautiful day as we’re having here in Los Angeles.
You have a good one yourself Ann.
Michael, my maternal great grandfather came from Ireland…and my luck, I look hideous in green!
Keep the faith!
Love and hugs!
It’s illegal to be indoors on such a beautiful day as we’re having here in Los Angeles.
You have a good one yourself Ann.
It is magnificent day out - you have a good one too Regan
If you’re ever in the vicinity of Canberra, Australia, I hope we can meet.
Zoe,
That sounds great - thanks
Ann: I know it’s not really the topic of this thread, but since I routinely criticize Alan Chambers on this blog and elsewhere, I wanted to offer a change of pace and sincerely compliment him on some of his very positive, recent comments and actions:
(1) He apologized to “those that have been unintentionally, but at times recklessly, misled by poorly defined labels and words used to describe the process out of homosexuality.”
(2) He agreed “wholeheartedly that clarifications need to be made on confusing terminology that at times has been used incompletely or misused.”
(3) He acknowldged that “the ‘change’ factor is one that has confused many” and that “when we use words like ‘change’ the burden is on us to clearly state what that means in our lives.”
(4) He has reccently announced that EXODUS intends to get out of politics and focus solely on ministry — although I’m not convinced that he’s being completely honest about this one… Time will tell. It’s still a very good start for Alan to announce it — and I sincerely hope it happens.
Timothy,
You say “There are many anti-gay Christian hate groups. They tend to say ‘we don’t hate the homosexual’ but their actions are pretty clear.”
Why is it I get the sense that you are prone to interpreting anything that disagrees with you as “hate” material? Is this super-sensitivity because you are in denial?
I apologize for delayed response –blogs are not my usual pastime –but your response to my Mar 15 post seems to assume that I was attacking and lying about persons who are convinced they’re homosexual. What I expressed is the witness of many former homosexuals about their own prior behavior and experience, on which they no longer base their identity, as well as the testimony of scripture which condemns BEHAVIOR, not persons. It is not “evil” to warn others that certain behaviors have negative consequences. No one is “maligned” by this.
Yes, God’s grace is sufficient to forgive us all, but as St. Paul writes, “Are we to continue in sin, that grace may abound? By no means!” (Romans 6:1)
By the same token, I also dispute the categorization of “homosexual” and “heterosexual” as nouns. They are adjectives describing sexual perception and conduct, not descriptions of what or “who” we are. Self-identifying with one of these adjectives may tend to influence our lifestyle and relationships, but we have the free will to do so or not. The Bible says we should love one another, not reject those whom God loves; but it also very explicitly tells us not to sexualize any relationship other than within the marriage of a man to a woman.
Tim, I appreciate your concern for me and my relationship with God, but please allow the scriptures to speak to you personally, without imposing the filters of preferred interpretation. Accept the guidance of the Holy Spirit rather than the advice of certain revisionists.
Hi Dave…your post to Tim had me thinking: this isn’t about ‘disagreement’, nor are the actions against gay people centered on behavior alone. How is anyone supposed to know you have a sex life if you’re dismissed from your job or assaulted or suspended from school simply from the disclosure or suspicion you’re gay?
Disagreement is a tame word that’s inappropriate for what happens. A blow to the head isn’t a disagreement. Fired from your job isn’t either. That isn’t even room for negotiation or defense.
Sure, in YOUR mind it might be a disagreement. But to a gay person…or ANYONE who is a member of us suspect classes, most often what you DO doesn’t matter. It’s what you ARE.
I’ll say it again. Homosexuality has been a fact of human life since BEFORE organized religion or fair interpretation of what it is. Some cultures have accepted it as simply a difference of orientation and not a matter of moral or deliberate decision.
Which frankly NONE of us can disagree with our orientation or wanting to have someone love us sexually and love them back.
I might add that your last paragraph is your own advice staring back at you.
The interpretation of homosexuality and the control of the information regarding it has until very recently been dispensed by other heterosexuals. Gay people should be able to interpret who they are FOR YOU.
Identity is a