Earlier this month, Exodus executive director Alan Chambers charged into Berkeley, Calif., determined to thwart hordes of hateful and violent liberals.

What he found, but still fails to acknowledge, is that his stereotypes about “liberals” and Northern Californians are untrue.

For starters, UC-Berkeley is not an “extremely liberal campus” — it hasn’t been since the Vietnam War.

Chambers also found (with a mix of relief and disappointment) that “[t]o our surprise there were no picketers, angry exchanges or incidents to report.” Alas, reality fails to substantiate Chamber’s belief that university campuses, and gay-tolerant people, are intolerant and violent toward the intolerant.

Little of the argumentation in favor of gay marriage related to race, but Chambers falsely asserts that this was the primary argument. It is not clear whether Chambers really listened to much of the debate in which he was participating. Perhaps, if one’s mind is made up, one doesn’t need to listen to others.

In his opening statements, Chambers explains (as he has done before) why he favors discrimination against gay couples:

Had same-sex marriage been legal in 1990, I am certain that I would have tested that option.

Chambers seems to believe ex-gays are sufficiently unhappy with their choice of celibacy that he must make gays even more miserable — by discriminating against their relationships — in order to keep the ex-gay movement from unraveling. In other words, Chambers believes he must deny ex-gays the “mature adult” choice of whether to be a happy gay person or a happy ex-gay person — by subjecting gay couples to a legal and financial obstacle course. (The state of Virginia has even moved to declare financial contracts and powers of attorney between gay partners null and void.)

While Berkeley extended its hospitality to Chambers, the ex-gay director did not return the favor. He concludes:

Through my story God planted seeds in the hearts and minds of unbelievers. I pray that all of the homosexual men and lesbian women who attended the symposium will be haunted with the truth about change and that it will propel them towards a relationship with Jesus Christ.

In this sweeping statement, he condemns all the gay-tolerant people in attendance and presumes to lock them out of the faith in which many of them are already leaders. And he prays that they will be “haunted.”

If Chambers’ remarks do not qualify as bitter contempt for gay people of faith, then I’m not sure what does qualify.

Categorized in: