Comments on: Christian Post reports on Golden Rule Pledge

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:17:16 +0000

Thanks Warren! 🙂

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:28:14 +0000

Debbie – Please read the context. I mentioned it because jayhuck seemed to think the sentence about change was a part of the GRP.
I will add though that change means different things for the different groups. Change in context is what the DOS kids are going for (a more gay friendly environment) and the DOT kids are talking about change of orientation.
Exodus has been in the past quite political. I would say recently, they have sent mixed messages.

By: Debbie Thurman

Debbie Thurman — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:22:33 +0000

Warren, the DOT also is not the GRP, yet you mentioned your dislike of their use of the word change. The word’s fair game in both contexts, is it not? You singled it out in the one but not the other. I merely wanted to know why. Is Exodus a political entity in you view?

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:38:02 +0000

The GRP is not the DOS so why are asking me about the materials? I would not agree with all of the changes asked for by the GLSEN materials.
In contrast to what you quoted and what the DOT is about, the GRP is non-political. The differences of perspective will continue and not be changed by either day. The GRP will not fix that but hopefully where applied, it will help tone down the rhetoric which reaches levels that cannot sustain relationships.

By: Debbie Thurman

Debbie Thurman — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:27:43 +0000

Warren, if the unspecified “change” mentioned on the Day of Truth cards bothers you, are you also bothered by GLSEN’s reference to “change” in the context of their DOS materials? GLSEN’s “How To Get What You Want with an ‘Ask'” says, “The Day of Silence can be a great tool to catapult change at your school. Do you want a more LGBT inclusive library, teacher training, LGBT inclusive nondiscrimination policies or something else? If you want something to change — you can use the Day of Silence to help with your ‘ask!'” Also on that flier is this example of what “LGBT inclusive nondiscrimination policies” means: “We wanted a queer-friendly prom, and after showing that many students and staff care, we got a queer-friendly prom. We said we wouldn’t be silenced, and we won’t.”
So, tell me again about how GLBT students are silenced? They are the most vocal and catered-to minority of students on campuses. And how is GLSEN’s DOS not a political tool for change? It is blatantly political. They must love you and your GRP. You’re playing patsy with them.
How am I wrong?

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 13:51:56 +0000

Debbie – The change is possible mantra does not specify what kind of change is possible. And it does not qualify how frequent or to what degree it might be possible. Nor does it indicate why someone would want to change.
It still has people talking past each other.
The glb and progressive kids want to talk about fair and respectful treatment and the DOT kids want to talk about change and homosexuality being wrong.
In my work with college students, I hear all the time about how infrequently this works. This is why most Christian college students are so turned off to the business as usual ex-gay world (read unChristian).

By: Debbie Thurman

Debbie Thurman — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:56:17 +0000

Warren, I totally agree that walking out of schools in protest of the DOS is wrong and only stirs emotions and broadens the divide. However, I am wondering why you find the DOT cards and statement about the freedom to change objectionable. The Golden Rule Pledge is fine, but does it really lead to useful dialogue? Isn’t it possible for people to interpret it as tacit support for homosexuality? I see nothing in the DOT plan that is disrespectful. So, what’s your beef with it?
Also, given the widening acceptance of homosexuality, how much gay bullying is really going on in schools these days? I believe GLSEN overstates it, which does give them a political motive. GLSEN’s 2003 survey found “a significant decline” since 2001 in the bullying speech toward gays among students. Ritch Savin-Willians did a survey at Berkeley in 2002 that showed only 5 percent of GLBT students got a negative response from peers when they came out. I know Berkeley isn’t Middle America, but given California’s passage of Prop. 8, there is still plenty of anti-gay angst, or at least traditionalism, in the state.
Kevin Jennings has been as guilty of anti-Christian hate speech as any gay activist on the planet. That alone makes GLSEN suspect in my book. Why give him a pass
What of the discrimination against ex-gays? Students deserve to know the whole truth. That includes knowing where the Golden Rule comes from (Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount), and its context in scripture. Jesus gives it just before he contrasts the two ways of the narrow and the wide gates and warns against false teachers. Matthew 7:12-20. Isn’t your Golden Rule lacking a bit of clarity?

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:15:19 +0000

Jayhuck – That sentence is on the Day of Truth card, not the GRP. That sentence is one of the reasons I do not support the DOT.

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 04:40:32 +0000

I’m a full supporter of the GRP, and I thank Warren for spurring Evangelicals to do something like this.
In the card that is handed out though, there is a phrase that reads:

There’s freedom to change if you want to

What exactly does that mean? It seems to border on patronizing. Real respect rarely involves direct attempts at conversion. I would assume there is room for the Evangelicals to change as well? I’d just like some clarification on this