The Boston Globe has a story [free registration required] on Richard Land, the Souther Baptist Convention’s lobby in Washington.
Gay leaders are particularly alarmed about Land’s promotion of ”reparative therapy” to transform sexual orientation. At the Southern Baptist Convention’s annual meeting in June, Land unveiled a video in which former gays and lesbians attribute their life paths to childhood sexual and physical abuse. (The men and women also condemned the intolerance of many religious figures they encountered.) More than 300 copies were distributed to churches as instruction on how to minister to gays and lesbians.
The article covers some of the action he’s taken in Washington, and some of the connections he has in the current administration. It mentions that Land was a personal friend of Bush in the late 80’s. While it should come as no surprise that the head of the SBC’s public policy arm forwards ex-gay rhetoric, the article does not mention how often those specific talking points come up in Land’s work. Considering how much of the article is devoted to Land’s work on gay issues, however, the ex gay line probably gets a good amount of attention.
See the problem with this type of stuff is that for the most part, gays don’t get to give their side of the issue. People like Land, Sheldon, and others tell the conservative religious crowd that there is an answer to homosexuality–reparative therapy. The conservative groups (for the most part) fall hook line and sinker for this. They don’t question it, don’t realize the questionable success rates or even definition of success, and since gays have been successfully ostracized among these groups for the most part, there is no way for gay groups to go in and disprove all of this half-truth and deception.
I agree with you, Brady. The biggest problem is that most of the conservative religious crowd has been taught not to think on their own. They believe what they are told and close their ears and eyes to everything else. They are told that the only reliable news comes from CBN or the TVC or AFA organizations. And they believe it. It’s hard to break through the strong belief they have that everyone else is telling them lies to try to get them away from Jesus. They view any other information as coming from Satan or “the pit of hell.” It’s hard to get them to look beyond what they’ve been told. And I’m speaking from personal experience here…
Then perhaps “we” need to be more, urgh, evangelical about this?Personally, when I am compelled to attend a Church (births, deaths, marriages) I often sneak a nice stack of tri-folds from our local gay support lines etc into the rack by the door.I haven’t yet reduced myself to drawing dreadful comics and leaving them in public toilets…
Um, I’m floored. The Southern Baptists have a lobbyist in WashDC? Why? I would have believed that they would believe that their connection with the guy upstairs would be enough.
raj,
“I would have believed that they would believe that their connection with the guy upstairs would be enough.”
It is funny, isn’t it, that you can simultaneously believe that your God is capable and willing to send hurricanes, that He can protect you from a car accident, that He can make your boss treat you better, that He can change the hearts of the leaders of foreign countries, but when it comes to local legislation He’s totally incompetent.
You have to spend money, hire lobbyists, and mobilize the vote. In fact, He’s so weak and his message (as you preach it) is so non-compelling that you have to lie to get His will done.
But that’s what you get when you have a God that’s more interested in who is elected President than he is in how many people are illiterate or starving to death.
If I were God, I’d come down in person just to say “stop using my name”.
perhaps we should request a copy of said video
Dan, do you think the video is “I Do Exist?”
I’ve often wondered about the reception that a bunch of gays,lesbians and straight allies would get if we picketed outside of evangelical “churches” with signs reading “You can repent – join a real church,” or “Southern Baptist = Satan Lover” or even less explosive statements, trying to convert their congregations to our morals/ethics. I am sure we would be roundly attacked for doing exactly the same thing as the “religious right” does at some of our Pride events or through their literature.
Timothy, you’re exactly correct. If this God of theirs is omniscient, he/she/it could control things on this little planet. The fact that he/she/it apparently doesn’t shows that either
(i) he/she/it isn’t as omniciant as previously suggested;
(ii) he/she/it doesn’t care about you;
(iii) he/she/it just wants you to go away.
There are other possibilities.
Guys, let’s not malign religious people for not believing in fatalism. They use phones rather than rely on God to telepathically communicate their wishes. They use tools to build their houses rather than praying for one to appear. Does that make them foolish?
No, it means that they believe that their God is both omnipotent, capable of performing miracles, yet normally works through humble/human means. That viewpoint is not incoherent, although there are some curious puzzles associated with it–which the Bible and theological systems attempt to solve.
What is more incoherent is that Southern Baptists, who are typically a- or pre-millenial (believing that the kingdom of God is not going to appear through the means of political power–in contrast to post-millenials, who believe it will) are trying to use worldly means to accomplish spiritual goals. THAT is the inconsistency, not the fact that their God is omnipotent (I think that’s what raj meant, rather than omniscient, which has to do with knowledge.)
Let’s try to understand a viewpoint before building straw men and knocking them down.
They get a lot of money, media attention and devotion out of being anti-gay. That is why they try to make people hate gays. They know they won’t get as much money or media attention if they are pro-gay.
What disgusts me the most is their new efforts to indocrinate teens and make teens into tools for their propaganda. These are the same people who have spent decades claiming that gays want to “pervert” or “molest” teens and now they are exploiting them in such a vile manner. And the media, anti-gay as always, will go right along with the idea that this is to “save” the kids and that these kids are “confused”. Things just seem to get worse and worse with each year in terms of the slack that people cut these hate groups.
james,
I’m not as cynical about the Southern Baptists and the other Fundamentalists. They aren’t anti-gay just for the money.
They currently see the world as a battlefield of Good v. Evil. They are Christian soldiers at War with Evil and they see us as the vanguard of the enemy.
Anything that is slightly beneficial to us is a vitory for “our side”. That’s why otherwise decent people are trying their hardest to take away health insurance or refuse to let gay people adopt kids who would otherwise never have a real home.
It’s not because of the money or attention they get. It’s not because they want to see folks sick or kids without homes. It’s because in their worldview these are just unavoidable unpleasantries resulting from War.
I got a newletter from author and radio personality Rabbi Schuely Boteach.
He restates what is the common belief of Jews…and why they don’t prosletyze.
It’s because they don’t and aren’t certain they know the truth about anything.
There is room for doubt, and a flex in belief when confronted with evidence.
As I said, this is why fewer and fewer Jews are participating in these anti gay crusades.
I’ll email Mike Airhart the newsletter.
The rabbi is mostly speaking from the urgency that Jews feel to increase their numbers and impart their abilities to be strong on each other and the communities they inhabit.
And also asserting Jewish identity at the same time.
Something that gays and lesbians are doing all the time. Aand should relate to better than any other cultural argument for existence.
This is why I think it’s a continued criminal and immoral pursuit, to rearrange the identity of a minority that is distinct and it’s ill advised to insist on the diminishing of identity with a legacy of violence against those groups still very acute.
I sent this opinion and the article to Chad Thompson.
I was reading through his Des Moines Register article.
And he’s not really that committed to both sides.
And what he’s failing to acknowlege is that the conversion side has ALWAYS and MOST often been given the floor, so that if their message is connected to diminishing said gay minority-than it is an undesirable message on it’s face and essentially we should be done with it.
To him, that might seem unfair or a diminishment of the conversion point of view.
But he’s not given to address the BIGGER aspects of the divide.
As are so many who support conversion.
It doesn’t matter how gently or compassionately you approach the support of conversion.
The point is, it shouldn’t be encouraged at all.
Homosexual existence and the right to exist unchalleged is the war…
Compromising the numbers of who SHOULD…is the battle.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
But I’m concerned with ALL gay children developing without ANY interference in their identity. This has been fought for, for so long already and deserves to be unchallenged for a change.
ck
I’m not trying to malign religous people. I am one.
It just seems to me that some good Christian folks are trying to build a Kingdom of God that is more “meat and drink” and less “rightousness, peace and joy”.
The scriptural reference is from Romans 14, a passage that I believe is particularly relevant to how gay Christians and ex-gays should react to each other. Even if you aren’t particularly religious, it is sound advice – from a philosophical point of view – on how to treat someone that disagrees with you.
I recommend a glace at it if you aren’t familiar.
https://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Romans%2014%20;&version=31;
oh, and that wasn’t just directed at ck… sorry 🙂
Timothy,
Thanks for sharing that passage
Timothy, my comments were more for raj than for you. I think that you’re right about the misplaced focus on the kingdom of God– in fact, that would be the criticism I’d level, rather than fatalism.
I’m currently a unitarian univeralist, but spent a couple of years in a conservative presbyterian seminary, and went to Grove City College–so I am pretty familiar with the inconsistencies in religious efforts in politics. I just would rather our critiques of them be substantive– especially if we expect the same in return…
Thanks for the citation, too.
ck:
Apparently you misunderstand. If God really wanted the politicians in Washington DC, it seems to me that he would have the wherewithall to tell that to them (the politicians) himself. He would not need an intermediary from the Southern Baptists.
I’ll put it more directly. Supposedly God spoke directly to Moses. It seems to me that he can also speak directly to Bill Frist and Denny Hastert.
One wonders: on whose behalf is this lobbyist really lobbying for? God? Or the Southern Baptists? There is a difference.
There are many who still give me hope for Christians…
Bishop John Shelby Spong
Bishop Desmond Tutu
Rev. Jimmy Creech
Rev. Cecil Murray
for starters
I could go on…my list is very long, fortunately.
These men don’t go to Washington-they go to their flock and their persuasion is usually very powerful.
They are all getting up there in years…where…oh where…
is the new guard?!