Regardless of who said it or why, I truly believe times have changed. I know there are many people today wanting to give Exodus the right to be who they are, to preach their message – I think many more people have become accepting of the idea that anyone, straight or gay have the right to live the way they choose.

The real problem today, and I believe a real reason many people are critical of Exodus today, is because of who they are in bed with (Focus on the Family and James Dobson) and how deeply they are involved with politics. I’d stop speaking out against Exodus if they would stop their political games.

The other problem with politics goes deeper and has to do with their double standard. They want equal rights, they want respect and equal treatment, but they don’t want to give that to gay people.

All of these things are real problems – and why, I believe, Exodus will make no progress until they change their ways – They keep taking two steps forward, but also 3 back. Alan’s mixed comments of late are good examples of that.

I do hope the poster resurfaces because I’d like to have them defend their comment in the face of my very real memories. I was always extremely cautious about any political involvement; my ministry partner (an Exodus board member) and I discussed politics enough to know that 1) we had some serious issues with ‘right wing’ politics 2) we didn’t want our message muddied by connecting to groups who had high-levels of homophobia mixed in with their Christian agenda 3) we didn’t even agree with each other on every gay-related political issue. We lost or turned down support from a number of congregations because of our refusal to make political statements or support particular right-wing causes. Please believe me, we felt strongly enough about this issue that we would have separated from Exodus back in its infancy if it had been political.

One of the hotbed issues way back then was ‘returning prayer to schools’. On the surface, it looked like an issue that every conservative Christian should support but I saw (and see) it differently. I saw state enforcement of religion. “Prayer in school’ used to be a one minute meditation that came piped in from the principal’s office (think Ferris Buehler’s Day Off). It struck me even then that there were people in my school who were religious but not Christian. You can’t require Jews, Hindus, Muslims etc to attend your public schools and then force them to take part in a daily ‘Jesus lesson’. (I felt particularly cheated when Gore/Lieberman did not assume the presidency; I wanted to see how they were going to handle the typical ‘Billy Graham, hand on the (christian) Bible’ swearing in.) Anyway, a number of Exodus leaders had similarly diverse views that kept us a safe distance from the politically involved conservative Christians.

The first and only political statement of any nature that I can recall from our Exodus affiliate was “A Compassionate Response to Aids” where we actually distanced ourselves from the prevailing conservative responses at the time.

I’ve read so much on this site I don’t remember where I read it, but I promise you it was here. Alan had made a comment that for Exodus to get out of politics wouldn’t get most people off its back because Exodus didn’t used ot be political and people were trying to undermine them then, and another person countered that Exodus had never NOT been political. Hopefully someone will read this and say it again.

I don’t remember the discussion you referenced re some ex-Exodus people stating that there was never a time that Exodus wasn’t political. I don’t recall ANYONE blogging here that could speak to the early days of Exodus except Michael Bussee, myself and an occasional visit from my former ministry partner, Robbi Kenney. So, please help me to locate the discussion you referenced.

(We’re in a blog time-warp, by the way. This is actually a thread from May that reactivated. LOL! The ‘couple of discussions back’ could actually be in thread topics yet to come.)

It is one thing to secure protection for your own views, its another thing entirely to actively seek to prevent others from having those same rights – which is what Exodus does now, and it is very two-faced in its demands.

If you remember, a couple of discussions back, some ex-Exodus people stated that there was never a time when Exodus wasn’t political, and I believe that.

You are right – it is “Patently unfair”, and I’d go one further, UNJUST, to prevent gay people from having the benefits of marriage, which include, but are not limited to, those few protections you listed under your statement on domestic partnerships.

This isn’t a matter of marriage in the religious sense – gay people can already get married at a number of different Churches – its a matter of having the secular state recognize those relationships and bestow on them the benefits they give to other taxpayers.

By the way, when I was involved with a local ex-gay ministry our client mix included Roman Catholics, Orthodox Catholics, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Lutherans (several persuasions) Baptists, United Methodists and non-denominational charismatics. There was one Lutheran congregation and one Baptist that established support groups in their respective churches. The others relied on us as their resource.

Timothy,

Thanks for acknowledging the different member agencies within EXODUS! I appreciate it more than I can say!

I was chewing on your Catholic/anti-Catholic analogy. One sentence, in particular, struck me as especially significant to this discussion. “And to the extent that anyone tried to pass laws or erect barriers that in any way were detrimental to Catholics or the observance of their faith, I would oppose those efforts.”

Way back before EXODUS ever got politically involved, we became aware that those who disagreed with our theological view were indeed trying to ‘erect barriers’ that were detrimental to US and the observance of OUR faith. Even then, our point of view was being ignored (much as it was in the list of spirituality based resources). What happened to the rights of a gay person who shares my theological views re homosexuality to even find a spirituality based resource that understands and supports their theology?

What happened to their rights to evaluate for themselves the validity of such a resource?

When I was involved with EXODUS, we didn’t discuss politics much. I always discouraged any type of political involvement because I felt it would distract from our main message. Those who defended political involvement raised questions like the ones I just presented. They’d also point to attacks, similar to Michael’s above, disparaging our goals and branding us ‘clearly delusional’. When you begin to recognize such public pressure against you, you have no choices other than to let it continue unchecked or to take steps to secure your rights politically. While I chose the road of political non-involvement, I could not refute that a public agenda was being worked against us and our beliefs. Others did began to tread the political waters. (As to how those waters have gotten so muddied, we’ve discussed that before and will again.)

BTW: When I have been compelled by politically conservative Christians to state my own political opinion, I admit to being guided by this principle.

“Homosexuals should have the same rights as any other sinner.” (Remember, I’m talking to THEM, I need to connect with their picture.) You don’t think you should be forced to rent to a gay-couple? Well, what other sins-of-exclusion are on your list? Do your tenants have to sign a list of legal but ‘immoral’ behaviors that they will not engage in?

The issue that often brings me to a point of anger is related to domestic partnerships. Gay people contribute via taxes and insurance premiums to programs from which they receive no benefit. (I’m a single, childless man but I’ve been paying to support schools all my adult life.) It is patently unfair and unjust to deny any health benefits or to restrict partnership benefits in any way.

I’m of a similar mind regarding end of life and estate issues. I am outraged when I hear of essentially estranged families who step in at the end, sever the partners and deprive the survivor of the estate.

I hereby speak for all gays (well, obviously not really, but here’s my own answer):

It’s a matter of personal decision v. oppression. I fully respect your decision not to “think homosexuality is not the way to live” but I have no respect whatsoever for anti-gay sentiments/ groups.

Let me use a different example to help you understand:

I am a Protestant Christian. As such, I do not think that Catholicism is the way to live. I do not partake in confession, chatechism, praying the rosary, veneration of Mary, following Papal decree, or any of the other aspects in which my faith differs from Catholicism. I may even go so far as to think some of those things are “wrong” and contrary to God’s will.

But I am not anti-Catholic. I don’t ascribe to Catholics some vile characteristics or make up bogus mortality rates. I don’t extrapolate the evils of one bad priest to be characteristic of priests as a whole. I don’t think that the sacrements of my church should be enforced by law to the detriment of Catholics. In fact, to the extent that I would ever even comment about my differences with Catholicism would be in the context of respectful Scriptural debate – and to date I’ve never had that discussion. Because it isn’t neccessary.

I believe that Catholics and Protestants can live peaceably and in harmony without every having to agree or approve of the doctrines of the other. And to the extent that anyone tried to pass laws or erect barriers that in any way were detrimental to Catholics or the observance of their faith, I would oppose those efforts.

So I can think Catholicism to be wrong or even think it an immoral and ungodly practice (I don’t, by the way) without ever being anti-Catholic.

So too can a principled person think homosexuality to be wrong or even an immoral and ungodly practice without ever being anti-gay. I wish more would.