“God’s Grace and the Homosexual Next Door” is a new book written by several senior leaders at Exodus International. On page 115:
Stand up for gay people. The church and conservative Christianity hasn’t been a safe, welcoming place for homosexuals. Oftentimes pastors and youth leaders make insensitive remarks about homosexuality or gay people. These remarks can be devastating. When you’re a witness to unkind words, or a judgmental attitude, or hate, stand up for gay people. Boldly and graciously confront injustice and hatred. Jesus always stood up for the sinner, and we should as well.
[This particular passage is from a chapter by Mike Goeke.]
Last weekend the Family Research Council held an event called “Liberty Sunday” at Tremont Temple Baptist Church in Boston where a number of political leaders of the religious-right spoke. Included in the lineup was Exodus President Alan Chambers and Bishop Wellington Boone. According to the FRC’s own official transcript Boone had this to say:
We know what a family is. My wife said to me this morning, she said, “Well, okay then. It’s sodomites because they’re not gays; it’s a misnomer. They’re sodomites.”
…If God calls homosexuality an abomination, if he calls it vile affections, if he calls it wickedness, I can’t call it inappropriate behavior. (Applause.) So if this is just a small matter, I’ll tell you what — let two women go on an island and a whole bunch of – all women, if you’re sodomites, go on an island, stay by yourself, all women, put all the men on another island – this is my wife talking to me this morning – let them stay. I’ll tell you what: “We’ll come back and see you about 100 years.”
The speaker after Boone was Bishop Gilbert Thompson followed immediately by Alan Chambers. To quote Exodus’ book:
Did Mr. Chambers hear Mr. Boone’s “insensitive remarks about homosexuality or gay people?”
Was Mr. Chambers “witness to unkind words, or [Boone’s] judgmental attitude, or hate?”
As Exodus’ book commands, did Mr. Chambers “stand up for gay people” and “boldly and graciously confront injustice and hatred?”
Just FYI, at the same event, Boone inflicted his own grotesque homosexual rape fantasies upon his audience.
And at a prior gathering of immoral “Values Voters,” Boone told Christians to call same-sex-attracted persons “faggots” and “sissies.”
Ignorance and hate are just sad.
Maybe Mr. Alan Chambers now considers his label to “ex-sodomite.” It is the one word which society thought ‘clean enough’ to associate with homogenic sex. And yet there is nothing in the scriptures which can call for any interpretation that one homosexual person existed in Sodom. It is thus the word of oppression.
Reading Chambers’ speech in the FRC site, he’s just the same as Boone only slicker. He’s ever the smug, self-righteous prevaricator when among people who don’t care about the truth as were in that church.
As Exodus’ book commands, did Mr. Chambers “stand up for gay people” and “boldly and graciously confront injustice and hatred?”
No.
In order for Mr. Chambers to “stand up for gay people,” he would have to have backbone and a strong sense of honor. Doing the right thing is often times tough and might jeopardize his organization’s substantial grants from the Religious Right. There is nothing to indicate that Mr. Chambers has the above neccessary qualities to confront hatred against gays.
Besides, it is my strong impression that he works in his own way to foster societal hatred against gays and lesbians, and self hatred in particular among the gay and lesbian folks he “helps.” So, ultimately what is the difference whether you foster hate with vulgarities or the smooth double-speak of Exodus?
Perfect timing to devalue their own ExodusYouth “Allies, Too!” campaign this week, October 15-21. Meant to counter GLSEN’s “Ally Week.”
http://groundswell2006.org/truth/resources.htm
The pledge cards are similar to GLSEN’s but with the obligatory “for more info about freedom from homosexuality, visit http://www.exodusyouth.net” at the bottom.
By signing this card, I, _________________, am dedicating myself to making this campus a safe and abuse-free place for all students.
My commitment is to:
1. Never use slurs or demeaning language against anyone.
2. Make efforts, when I feel it’s possible, to stop any name-calling or harassment I see.
3. Express my beliefs with compassion, and pursue respectful dialogue with those who disagree.
“Did Mr. Chambers ‘stand up for gay people’ and ‘boldly and graciously confront injustice and hatred?'”
Nope, ‘fraid not. But can you imagine what sort of incredible courage it would have taken for him to do that in a gathering with THOSE people present? Sure many of us would have less trouble doing so, but we’re in a whole different place in our lives than Alan. The man doesn’t really seem malicious – it seems he’s more caught between a rock and a hard place. I really don’t think that Alan is doing what he’s doing for the money, either. If you’ve really got no principles, it wouldn’t be hard to make more money than he’s making right now, and be less uncomfortable doing it.
I really think that he’s driven by a mix of awkward, inflexible, and often conflicting principles that he’s internalized, and the need to be accepted and admired by those he sees as important. Many of us should be able to relate to that, although perhaps in a less extreme way. I saw the same thing once in an Exodus speaker who came to town to scout out the potential for a satellite ministry here. He was talking the talk reasonably well, but his discomfort with what he was saying was virtually palpable, and he didn’t know how to respond to mature, loving, Christian gay people. I haven’t been able to find anything on him recently at the Exodus website — I imagine that he was on his way out of the organization at the time, given his presentation.
Alan is in the unenviable position of having, at times, to sacrifice his integrity for a public message that even he must recognize to be problematic in places. He’s not an idiot. However, if he were to be truly honest in his words, and question the clear incongruity between some of his most essential principles, he knows that he would lose the support and admiration of people who are very important to him. Can you imagine the cognitive dissonance that the man must endure? He’s clearly risen to where he is in Exodus because he’s able to suppress that dissonance better than most and speak in a charismatic and convincing way (unlike our other guest from Exodus). However, it cannot be a comfortable position to occupy.
Marcus it seemed pretty malicious to me when Alan Chambers said gay people were being used by Satan for evil purposes.
Alan is in the unenviable position of having, at times, to sacrifice his integrity for a public message that even he must recognize to be problematic in places.
What does it profit a man if he should gain the whole world but lose his own soul?
Perhaps, Randi, but for a Christian person to say that someone is “being used by Satan” is not necessarily a malicious indictment of the person. It may be socially awkward or impolite to say it, but it is not an attack on the individual. The hostility is, at least in theory, directed toward the Satanic influence presumed to be doing the exploiting.
That’s a little difficult to accept when you’re the one who’s being accused of doing the Devil’s work and you know that nothing could be further from the truth. However, from the perspective of the person making the declaration, it’s a statement full of compassion for the “victim of Satan.”
I don’t buy it Marcus, anyone making that statement knows exactly how insulting and malicious it comes across, they know odds are good the recipient of the comment will see this as being equated with Satan. It is essentially saying that for all intents and purposes the accused should be treated like Satan as Satan is in control. There’s no excuse for that kind of insult.
Marcus said:
However, from the perspective of the person making the declaration, it’s a statement full of compassion for the “victim of Satan.”
I am probably as familiar with fundamentalist Christian teaching as any here, but I have to say I have never heard the accusation that someone is being “used by Satan” as one of compassion for the “victim of Satan.” I vaguely understand what you are trying to say, but I think you are being far too generous.
Yeah, I probably misstated that a bit. When someone says that another person is “used by Satan,” it’s not necessarily compassionate. I think what I meant to say was that it’s not necessarily malicious. Many times, Christian people really believe what they’re saying when they talk about “hating the sin and loving the sinner.” To the “sinner” involved, the distinction isn’t that important.
However, I do think it is important to do our best to understand the motivation of the people on the “other side” here. For instance, it’s my impression that the motivation of Stephen Bennett is very different from that of Alan Chambers, and his is different from that of Chad Thompson or Myra Noyes. Understanding someone’s motivation can be very helpful in conversing with that person and being heard (or deciding when conversation is pointless).
Unfortunately, I’m afraid that the longer these guys spout the same message, they closer they get to one another in what keeps them ticking. However, people can and do leave the “ex-gay lifestyle” after having conversations that make their cognitive dissonance plain to them. I’m not sure we should give up on these guys just yet.
(Please — I’m not advocating that we get them all involved in hot, sweaty mansex — just that we leave the door open for them to stop working against equality and start living a little more genuinely, whatever that means for them)
I’m all for understanding the motivations. And I do think that those who are part of the evangelical movement often speak a different language than, say, a Catholic or a Quaker. Simple common words like “justice” can mean almost the opposite of each other depending on the community in which it is used.
That being said, while “used by Satan” is not the same thing as being accused of being Satan, I think it is implied that someone being used by Satan is doing so voluntarily. Involuntarily would probably be refered to as “possesed by the Devil” or “demon possessed”. Those who are possessed are assumed to no longer have control.
In Chambers’ language, it would seem that he’s saying that a gay person is (knowingly or unknowingly) doing the work of Satan of their own volition. The most charitable interpretation would be that they were “fooled by the lies of the Devil”.
In any case, not very nice.
(“I’m not advocating that we get them all involved in hot, sweaty mansex”…. ick!! I certainly didn’t need that visual)
Agreed and, as to footnote, double ick!
lol. Well, you both are really insightful guys, and I enjoy reading your posts. Just curious, what do you think it is that motivates Alan? Do you think that money or malice play a role?
I’ve not met Alan so I’m going to have to reserve judgment.
Someone needs to elevate this to a topic:
FBI Finds Few Sexuality-Based Hate Crimes
from staff reports (from Focus on TEH GAY: http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0042352.cfm)
quotes: “And once again, sexual orientation as a category of hate crimes comes in well
behind crimes based on race and religion,” said Caleb H. Price, a gender issues
analyst for Focus on the Family. “The problem is, when gay activists come to
the table to play their victim card — they are bluffing. The card isn’t even
in their hand.”
Riiiiiiight. Gays are NEVER victims.
Autumn, you might want to post the above at Pam’s if it doesn’t find traction here.
SharonB, given that gays make up a much smaller group of people than groups defined by race or religion its to be expected that they make up a much smaller percentage of hate crimes. For example the groups of people defined by race or religion might be 10 times as large as the group defined by gayness. If gays as a group suffer 1/3 as many hate crimes that still makes a gay person, what, three times more likely to be a victim of a hate crime than an someone of a particular religion or race?
Randi, Oh I totally agree! But that fact is totally lost on Focus.
I apologise for the way this thread is going, in advance, but it was the most closely related post I could find.
I just could not believe I was reading what a Focus spokesperson was saying. Really, the essence of his message is that gays are not victims. I REALLY think someone needs to confront Focus on this, I cannot remember a more indefensible and hateful remark for them!
Aha, the link is giving a page not found error.
Hmmm.
It was in yesterday’s Citizenlink on-line.
honest!
http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0042352.cfm
is the correct link. However, it looks like Focus won’t allow links in from XGW.
Paste it into your browser, it’ll work.
Oh, and abortion is somehow to blame, too! This from an MD (Dr. Maier).
However, it looks like Focus won’t allow links in from XGW.
Works for me 😉
SharonB,
The problem with the first link was that the “)” was included on the link. The second one takes us to FOTF.
So Focus thinks there are an acceptable number of gay hate crimes?
Have they stated how many gay people have to be harassed, hurt or killed before they decide it’s worthy of attention?
I thought they were pro-life.
Scott:
It’s not that they think it is an acceptable number, they don’t recognize it as significant at all. “The card isn’t even in their hand,” means that as far as they are concerned, hate crimes do not occur against gay people. Gay people cannot claim to be victims!
How else can that statement be read?
Where is the outrage over this?
Sharon,
Where, too, is the outrage among activists who used to track hate crimes? Not many organizations seem to be doing it anymore. We see a single report maybe once a year from the NGLTF. I appreciate the Task Force’s effort, but it’s not enough.
The national organizations seem to count on the FBI and local law enforcement to accurately and aggressively collect hate-crime data.
But how many local or state antiviolence organizations exist to monitor local law enforcement on an ongoing basis and hold police departments accountable for tracking and prosecuting hate crimes?
It does not seem to be a priority.
Sharon, I see “Focus on the Family” didn’t mention the number of hate crimes against gays so readers could compare. According to one of the earlier threads on this site
http://www.beyondhomophobia.com/blog/
it was 1017, almost as many as the 1190 religious hate crimes that occurred. So, that’s what “Focus” thinks is insignificant compared to religous hate crimes – the lying scum. As I said in my previous post this shows one is much more likely to be victimized for being a member of the gay group than for being a member of the religious group as they are far fewer members in the gay group than those identified by religion.
Well… at the risk of seeming uncaring, there are roughly 10 million GLBT people in the country (about 4.1% of the 240 M people over the age of 15).
With 1,017 orientation based hate crimes, the odds of being a hate crimes victim is roughly 0.01% or about 1 in 10,000.
Even if the numbers are underreported, it’s still not very high odds.
With about 44% of Americans attending church regularly (roughly 132 M) the odds of being a religious hate crimes victim is roughly 0.0009% or about 1 in 110,000.
In other words, neither case is very likely. Frankly, though I’m a gay Christian (a double target, you might say) I’m not really that worried. Sure it should be tracked… but I’m not staying awake nights.
But for the anti-gays to suggest that anti-Christian bias is higher, well that’s clearly just a lie from the pit of hell (as they said in my church growing up).
Timothy, don’t forget that crimes in general are under reported and even more so with anti-gay hate crimes as many victims are closeted and fear being outed or harassed by police. I don’t hold my boyfriend’s hand in public because I feel odds of being assaulted are much more than 1 in 10000 (and this is Canada).
I think the reason why Focus lies and obfuscates so much on this issue is that they are delusional about any sort of hate crimes legislation that covers orientation having implications for their religious duty to hate on GLBT persons. If they wave their magic wand and make the statistics disappear, then there is no need to have the hate crime laws.
Doesn’t excuse it, at all.
I wonder how they feel about removing religion as a basis for hate crime protection, since on a per capita basis it is less of a possibility than the orientation protection they complain about.
This is why I told Chad Thompson that anyone who can’t stand up for THEIR OWN IDENTITY is unfit to stand up for gay people, period.
You can’t straddle the process. You either have the articulation to know what gay identity IS, and not define it and defend it on STRAIGHT people’s terms.
I couldn’t and WON’T flatter Mr. Thompson or Mr. Chambers by saying their message and approach is good and forthright.
It ISN’T. It’s confusing and WEAK.
And Chambers has shown how weak HE is. Saying one thing, but when the chili hit the cheese, he DIDN’T stand up.
Alan Chambers is insulated from his deeds. He’s seems pretty assured he won’t be in a room full of gay people willing and able to shred his lame theories.
He wouldn’t show up even in a PFLAG meeting or Models of Pride conferences.
Which, unlike LWO conferences….are FREE.
God loves all and has made provisions for all (people)that believes in Him. He does say that homosexuality is an abomination but He also says He won’t leave you that way if you “want to be” what He wants you to be!
Randi makes an important point, and I said as much to our friend Foster as he accuses the gay community of manipulating statistics.
When you’re talking about a minority for whom identifying themselves as gay poses further risk, it’s likely the numbers are marginally inaccurate.
But not necessarily lower, and possibly much higher.
And law enforcement hasn’t always dealt with asking or being sensitive in the process.
It’s taken a lot of work for a victim to not be seen as somehow deserving of the assault.
I noted to Foster too, that only in very little girls and elderly women who have been sexually assaulted carry presumed innocence. Women between the teens and forties are questioned regarding their whereabouts and sometimes sexual history. Gay men are questioned in this manner too.
And these are the two groups given less sympathy and possibly the perpetrator tries to attain victim status.
This is the bias waters that other groups never have to wade in as far as hate crimes are concerned.
When a perp can think he’s got a chance of getting sympathy for COMMITTING the crime, the bias as to why he’d do that in the first place, speaks for itself.
I don’t hold my boyfriend’s hand in public because I feel odds of being assaulted are much more than 1 in 10000 (and this is Canada).
I have to say I have the same fear. Perhaps in certain areas this would not be as dangerous as in others, but overt same sex affection in public would get you in some big trouble around here. Even in Orlando or Tampa, I would be hesitant to walk hand in hand with another man. I’m not sure about those figures.
Oh, lookee…souljournerx left a sermonette.
Wow SJ….what made you think the good folks in here had’nt heard the same thing ALL THEIR LIVES already?
I guess it hasn’t occurred to you or anyone else anti gay, that it isn’t that gay folks aren’t being what God wants them to be.
Gay folks are’nt what STRAIGHT folks want them to be.
So when straight folks are feeling ignored…they’d rather the message be POUNDED into a gay person to make a point?
God and all of Creation knows what to do and make of gay people (MORE GAY PEOPLE, not less!)…it’s the straight folks who are too screwed up and misdirected.
So here’s a hot new tip…IT AIN”T YOUR BUSINESS!
It’s between God and the gay folks. God didn’t leave you in charge of dominion over gay people.
If you don’t mind, I want to see the full potential realized in gay folks. I welcome acceptance…I SURE have enjoyed full acceptance and it’s been wonderful.
Why don’t YOU try and earn gay folk’s trust first before you go judging.
That’s the problem with straight folks, acting like gay folks owe them an explanation and justification for being here.
Tell me, SoJo…do you ask God why the sky isn’t always blue? Do you fear the gray days, or welcome them as a good sign too?
Don’t demand to know what gay folks should be doing for YOU and playing the God card to do it.
Shame on you for that.
You’ve got your answer from Creation, you just don’t happen to LIKE it, because straight people were never the only answer to anything!
Posted by: Regan DuCasse at October 21, 2006 05:19 PM
Thanks for that, Regan, I missed that bit of hate-mongering from yet another anti-gay erroneously thinking we haven’t heard that silliness before.
Thanks, Regan. I pretty much agree with you re: Alan and Chad. I don’t endorse their message at all, and I’d hate to see them speaking on behalf of gay folks. I was just making the point that I don’t see either of them as malicious in their motivation (as opposed, for instance, to Fred Phelps or DL Foster). As many people on this thread have more experience than me with the famous ex-gays, I think it would be interesting to speculate a bit on their various motivations. It seems some are motivated by misguided beneficence, others by guilt/shame, some by an entrepenurial streak, others by need for approval and acceptance, and some just need people to pay attention to them. There was a fascinating article by Gary Schneeberger in the most recent Citizen Magazine put out by FOTF in which he explores anti-gay motivations from a very sensible perspective. It’s an article that I wish Dr. Dobson would take the time to read:
http://www.family.org/cforum/citizenmag/departments/a0042110.cfm
I missed that bit of hate-mongering…
Hate-mongering? Misguided yes, something we have heard before, yes, but I don’t see any overt hate in that particular post. I would reserve hate-monger for much worse than that.
David as I see it man created God in his own image and for god to call being gay an abomination is merely a reflection of the hate of man.