Today, April 17th, is the 13th annual “Day of Silence.” For those unaware, the “Day of Silence” is one day out of the school year when participating students choose to remain silent all day as a protest of the silence that many students must keep in order to avoid being harassed by anti-gay bullies at school. Special attention is paid to the Queer sector of the student body, as such bullying makes it difficult for students seeking to be sexually honest to come out. But their straight classmates could just as easily be victims. Even though this event originates from the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), there is no central entity that demands exactly how the DOS plays out at various schools. Students can choose to interact in class while being silent during their own social time between and after classes and during lunch. In fact, this may be an even greater sacrifice for students than simply not participating during class time. But contrary to statements repeated by anti-gay activists, participating students aren’t forced to keep from contributing to their classes.
Since 2004, the “Day of Truth” has been a conservative Christian response to GLSEN’s “Day of Silence.” DOT is sponsored by Alliance Defense Fund and “ex-gay” organization Exodus International, and encourages students opposed to homosexuality on religious grounds to start conversations with people about those views. They are also encouraged to refer gay students to Exodus, where they can find “hope” and “change.” Quite the contrary to DOS, DOT potentially causes disruption by telling students to engage in debates that can get ugly due to high tension and passions about those issues.
The messages promoted by the two “Days” are obvious. The former calls for an end to anti-gay bullying (not a specific promotion of homosexual acceptance as opponents believe), while the latter tells gay students to “change” so that they won’t be bullied, blaming the victims for their own oppression. And, as a result, the DOS serves all students – all potential targets of anti-gay bullying – and the DOT serves only those with aligning political intentions.
The DOS is not affiliated with any religion or political party, and anybody of any sexual orientation is welcome to participate. The DOT, on the other hand, only speaks to a very specific crowd: the conservative Christian crowd. A Jewish or Atheist student may ask, “How are you so certain you have the truth on your side?” DOT’s website tells participants to answer, “Jesus Christ said, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'” As a whole, this is a useless response. With the exception of private schools that associate with this creed, already a portion of the student body is lost to DOT students.
But even if DOT were a secular concept, it would still fail the entire student body. This is because while the two “Days” may seem diametrically opposed, they both are in fact pointing in slightly different directions. DOS targets all students, faculty, and administrators – gay and straight – by calling on them to become aware of the anti-gay bullying that still goes on in schools. DOT however, is focused on reaching out to the “gay-identified” peers of its participants. The anti-gay supporters of DOT don’t understand that anti-gay bullying doesn’t just happen to those who are gay. It happens to anyone who seems different, including straight kids.
Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover and Eric Mohat both killed themselves after enduring relentless anti-gay bullying at their schools. Neither one of the boys identified as gay. Pointing those two students in the direction of Exodus International would have done absolutely nothing to help them overcome or avoid anti-gay bullying – these children weren’t gay.
So, now what?
If the people being bullied with anti-gay epithets like “faggot” aren’t actually gay, how can an ex-gay program help them? And how would ingraining the message that “gay = sinful and unacceptable” soften the attitudes of those doing the bullying? If anything, it would only encourage them to viciously root out those who seem to fit that “unacceptable” mold, whether they are gay or actually straight. DOT’s website makes clear how they want to end the presence of the “gay identity” in schools. But do they want to end the presence of bullying based on the “gay identity?” DOT doesn’t give an answer – yet another example of the deafening silence from an anti-gay organization that claims to “love” gays.
Thank you for that excellent rundown, Emily.
You’ve pinpointed very precisely the illogicality, not to speak of the downright dishonesty, which underlies the Day of Truth [sic].
Great article!
Do you know if there has there been any acknowledgement from ADF or Exodus that their “Day of Truth” does nothing for straight students who experience anti-gay bullying?
(I don’t think this is particularly what you meant, Emily, but I felt like saying it : )
DOT; License to increase bullying of straight students by stigmatizing them as gay. And if that doesn’t work, sue.
I’ve canvassed that site, and as far as I’m concerned, their intent is not only to attempt to blunt DOS, but to encourage bullying, even if that means straight students.
I think some of them actually think that the presence of homosexuality is the precursor to the destruction of the US/World, via God’s upsettedness of course. So, those tragically heterosexual-youth suicides were necessary collateral damage, martyrs if you will.
Lord pray that the relentless vilification of LGBT public shcool students in the name of religious freedom is allowed to continue. In Jesus name, amen.
I found this part of the DOT website physically audible: “The study also showed that 43 percent of the men had had more than 500 partners in their lifetime, and 28 percent had over 1,000.”
Brought to you by Exodus International.
I participated in Day of Silence even before I was pro-gay just because I believed forcing silence would not help anyone. Why is that so hard to understand?
Great post Emily – thanks! The DOS is a vital part in bringing both sides of the issue together.
Emily K….
Outstanding work here and don’t ever stop, sister/friend!
The so-called “Day of Truth” is nothing but a cruel charade and intellectual aid and comfort to the gay-bashers. It doesn’t help anyone but those who want to be religiously smug about bashing gays, because, after all, those gays do have other choices…. what do they expect if they don’t choose to “change?”
Little different than Exodus, itself, which is why Exodus is aligned with this farce.
Excellent article. This issue causes me endless frustration because silence and/or intolerance only beget violence and bullying and solve nothing. Why can’t we all just get along and respect our differences?
This part is especially precious for me, as I had a similar thought 20-some years ago and started the end of my participation in the Catholic faith.
I didn’t know about the DOS or DOT, and I’m just glad I’m not in school anymore, my head would explode.
Vince
Shawn, since you and your ministry endorse “Day of Truth,” perhaps you can answer how such a bully-enabling event helps straight children who are bullied for “being gay,” even when they are NOT gay.
“ex-gay” in the house, everybody.
Additionally, statements such as these do not address bullied straight children and, like DOT, puts the onus on gays to simply act “less gay” so that people will stop pegging them as “gay.”
How does renouncing homosexuality help the straight boys I mentioned in the article, the ones who committed suicide?
And once they’ve accepted it, that’ll bring an end to all the bullying, won’t it? I don’t think! For heaven’s sake, let’s cut out such fatuous platitudes.
Wow,
Didn’t know there was so much hate in the house. I was merely commenting on your article Emily, because it is a message I fully endorse. Why can’t I like what both sides are doing to help people better understand homosexuality?
You are right, in that many straight kids are bullied because people think they are gay. It IS horrible what is happening. I just read a story online about an 11 year-old boy who hung himself because kids teased him for being gay.
My comment about being called a ‘fag’ can go for anyone – straight or gay – who is called a faggot. Until you have been called it enough that you actually believe it (which is a lot), you don’t know what sort of pain that person goes through. I’ve been there. Some of my straight friends were called fags also, because they hung around me. That statement I made can be taken as a general statement and as one speaking about gay teens.
In regards to my other comments you quoted, they are from an article I wrote about ministering to gay teens – coming from a Christian perspective in reaching teens who are already Christian, or have some sort of faith background. I never said in that article that by them embracing their identity in CHRIST the hate and harassment would stop. Kids are tough on kids today – it’s rougher now then when I was in school. Every kid, no matter who they are, gets picked on one way or another – every day – in school.
We need to end all hate in schools. Hence, why I ‘endorse’ the Golden Rule Pledge more than anything else on this day and Monday.
You know, Emily, I have a question for you: I didn’t come on here attacking anyone, but gave my thought on what you wrote – which I didn’t have a problem with. Why is it then, that you felt the need to exploit me by saying …. “‘ex-gay’ in the house, everybody”? What makes you any different from a jock yelling down a crowded school hallway, “Watch out, here comes the fag”.
Yes I am an “ex-gay” … if you must label me. Thanks for the label, I hadn’t had one put on me in a long time.
Maybe you would rather people not know you’re ex-gay/post-gay/formerly-gay-identified/struggling/on-the-journey-in-Christ or whatever other label is hip right now. But it’s right there on the website you posted a link to in your comment-name.
Thank you for answering the question about bullying.
Why should people know you are ex-gay? Because ex-gays – specifically those who run ministries – almost always have a political bent to them, usually involving opposition to equal rights, comprehensive sex education, and any general acknowledgment (not endorsement, simple acknowledgment) of the existence of gay couples in a school setting. Ministires like yours support groups like Exodus International, who has endorsed human rights violations in Uganda for the sake of eliminating homosexuality.
One example that goes against this grain is Wendy Gritter of New Direction. We were very skeptical of her at first, but she has proven to be truly compassionate and caring towards gays and the struggles they face. One thing that absolutely makes her different is her outspoken opposition to the human rights violations in Uganda, and the fact that she left Exodus.
I’m not afraid of anyone knowing my past – hence why I have a ministry devoted to it. Though, I myself prefer to be called Shawn. I don’t do well with labels … even t-shirt ones 🙂
You’re welcome for answering your question on bullying.
Though, you really don’t have a right to judge me or my ministry because you don’t know either of us. You are wrong to think that six11, or I, are bent on a particular political agenda. In fact if you were to read some post back, I come right out and state that I will not talk politics on this site. Yes, I may post an article to get people talking or I may express an idea, but for the most part, I don’t take up politics on my site – because that’s not what six11 ministries is about.
It’s about helping the Church and gays and lesbians better understand one another. I am a youth pastor, so I speak mostly to students and youth workers, helping them minister to gay students.
I realize that many don’t want to change or refute the change debate – fine. I will not pressure people into changing, because in the end they have to decide for themselves whether or not they want leave the gay life or not. My calling is not convert gays to straights, but rather people who are souled out to JESUS.
In response to Exodus … yes I have read some articles about their dealings in Uganda, and I am very disappointed and heart-broken over what has transpired. If you notice though, six11 does not endorse Exodus International nor are we affiliated with them in any way. I have links to some articles, that I like and agree with, which they have written, but that’s about it.
six11 is a bi-partisan ministry. The only party we follow after is JESUS.
I hope this sheds some light on who we are.
Great job with the article Emily (shout out from my partner, fellow Philadelphian). As for Shawns comments, I understand that he didn’t intend to let us know of his affiliation in his orginal comment, but since he responded later, I must comment about something he said above:
I don’t believe that being called a “fag” will make you believe you are. If that were true, the gay community would be a lot larger than it is. I also had a friend in school who was teased for being gay even though he wasn’t and years later he is happily married with children. I was also teased for being a “fag”, but it was because I was quiet, booking, not sports-minded, and not “butch enough”. It so happens that I also happened to discover that I was attracted to men/boys, so it happened to be true.
I do understand the pain. However, for the best way to get through it is to accept yourself for who you are. It is never a good idea to counsel someone to change themselves in order to be accepted. How would the DOT people feel if the response to someone being teased for going to church was “stop talking about Jesus and stay out of church”.
Something to think about.
Good points Clancy. I too hail from the awesome city of Philly. Lived there until about four years ago.
I appreciate your comments. I agree with what your saying, and I should have said what I did a bit more clearly. My apologizes. Majority of the time, those who are teased about being gay, or called fag, by their peers, especially those who deal with self-hate (like I did), usually do end up listening to what’s being said and accept themselves to be gay. I agree that all cases are different.
As for counseling students, I agree we can’t force them to change who they are – that’s something they have to do themselves. Though, as a Christian and a youth pastor, regardless of what teens are involved in, I counsel them to follow after the standards of GOD – which is tough, even for messy-pastors like myself. I counsel them in this manner because of my conviction that GOD’S truth still means something for today, and I want the students in my youth ministry to live and follow after GOD – not the world.
Also, I didn’t mean to mislead anyone about my identity. I wasn’t trying to hide it nor fly under the ex-gay radar. I didn’t think it was that important for me to start off my post with:
Hi, I’m Shawn and I’m an ex-gay.
That sounds too much like an AA meeting. Why must we put labels on everything? Just wondering.
Oh, and by the way, people do go around asking Christians to shut up and stop talking about JESUS and their faith. It’s a messy world in which we live in … I’m just trying to help bring the love of GOD to those who need it – i.e. all of us.
WOW! That article was powerful , not only powerful but really sad and disturbing! Emily, thank you for that , it was an eye-opener; and I thought I ( they are neither)had heard of every low-down trick the “religious” “right” had played.
Alas , this does not surprise me, but I am sure the Lord weeps over people using His name to justify ANY kind of hatred! If someone tells me bullying is normal behavior for kids, I say look to the parents; kids learn what they hear at home, like the “queer jokes” the “Let’s go out and bash a fag”, “God hates fags”, “He deserved that” etc ad nauseam. NO PERSON deseves that! Why these loons think it’s okay to do it speaks volumes about their relationship (or lack thereof) with Christ. Jesus never ever treated anyone like that in the Gospel, in fact, he showed nothing but love. When he DID get angry, it was at the religious establshment of his day. Those Pharisees are still alive and well today – sadly many of those people are in the Body of Christ yet miss the miss the parallel- those Gospels are as true todays as they were then- I think it best to fight politically againt them, and get to know them, come out and be heard, not just in a bar but in a church or a social group, so they see we’re not the demons they make us out to be!
Nope, I may be an old codger, I know bull when I see or hear it, just as surely as I know this “End the Lies” nonsense is a sick joke.
What more to do ? “Pray for our enemies… we know the rest” Not easy, but required!
God bless
Bill
We have a lot of ex-gays “in the house,” there is no need to announce them like covert operatives. The link is there to Shawn’s ministry and one can certainly point out the inconsistencies between statements here and positions held there, but I don’t see that anyone is hiding the connection. If Shawn has intentions other than honest debate, that will become clear on its own.
That said, Shawn, it seems more than a little disingenuous to say that you think Emily’s post is great while at the same time espousing support for the DOT. Your comments seem a bit like the glad-handing — cheerful, positive and seemingly supportive, but without much substance.
Perhaps Emily was ill at ease with what appears to be your micro-version (in this thread) of the co-opting anti-gay groups have performed with the formation of the DOT in the first place. For instance,
This is a classic ex-gay precept for how kids can “take on a gay identity” which is to say, one of the attempts at showing causation. I know of no data to suggest that this happens at all, but certainly not “a lot.” One could be forgiven for taking statements like that negatively. At the very least you would be required to show that data yourself — except that this is way off topic.
The topic of the original post is “Why the Day of Truth Fails All Students.” If you want to stay on topic and have a substantive discussion, perhaps you can explain how you can think the post is correct and at the same time support the DOT. But please do so as concisely as possible because redirecting this thread to be about you is not at all appropriate.
Emily wrote:
This is a central concern I have about the DOT. I don’t see how it helps build bridges or facilitates mutual respect. It does not seem to me that the message of DOT (we disagree with homosexual behavior and you can try to change it) will make anyone safer. The Carls and Erics of the world don’t benefit that I can see. Perhaps, evangelicals feel better that their right to speak their moral views are defended but beyond that I am not clear about who else benefits.
It does not seem to me that the message of DOT (we disagree with homosexual behavior and you can try to change it) will make anyone safer.
Warren, we agree, but please consider carefully what you have just admitted to.
Step back from DOT for one moment. It’s not a day in isolation.
This is the message behind ALL ex-gay efforts, and behind ALL social and religious groups that hold negative views about homosexuality and express them in public.
We agree: it’s a message that ultimately builds no bridges and fails to bring respect. No-one is safer. It’s unclear if anyone benefits, except those who get to express their negative viewpoints.
Given the profound implications that follow, I think it only fair you have an opportunity to retract or alter what you have just said. We’ll be sitting down, just in case.
(At the very least it calls into question the past decade of your working life — and I’m unsure if you meant to admit to that!)
Emily. Excellent article. For the ex-gays out there, I have a question (actually three): Is it so wrong to have a moment of silence to remember victims of crimes irregardless of their sexual orientation? Would you start preaching during a funeral of a gay person if the priest or preacher asked for a moment of silence? Can you preach with your heart or does your mouth always have to get involved?
Also, ex-gays who profess to be Christian, not all Christians agree with your interpretations of “The Truth.” Christ didn’t say, “Blessed are the straight and heterosexuals, for theirs is the Kingdom of God.” There are over 28,000 denominations in the U.S. alone, and they all disagree with at least one thing from another. And in those denominations there are those who view sexual orientation differently than others. So please do not equate following Christ with “converting” one’s sexual orientation as a requirement for Christianity. That may be a requirement for ___(fill in the blank of name of denomination) Christianity, but not Christianity as a whole.
So not to make this post about him – sorry Dave if it seems that – I would like to defend some accusations.
Dave – I’m not sure what inconsistency you have found in me; and no, my purpose here was to just say that I appreciated Emily’s article. If any of you would read my blog, you would also see that I speak out more against the churches actions then anything. It’s funny how the ones who call for equality to be had for everyone, are sometimes the ones who are quick to judge someone they don’t agree with. I have not come on here to promote anything, or to judge anyone.
I am not fighting any of you.
Dave and Alan – I support the DOT because the Christians have a right to be heard too. I do not fully support the message they are giving, but they still have a right to be heard. I agree, that we need to remember those who have lost the fight to stupid-violence …. and we need to take more than just one day to do it.
My comments about people’s words, are my own experiences. As you would clearly see on my sight, I do not claim to be a doctor or a professional counselor. I just speak of my own experiences. If it seems that I am generalizing people, I’m sorry.
You know, I’m surprised to get backlash from such a group. I have gotten backlash from Christians, which I expect, but I really didn’t expect it from this site.
Have a good weekend.
Shawn:
I am not fighting you either. You said,
And I am asking you, “Which Christians are you referring to?”
Not all who claim the name “Christian” believe the same things including the understanding of homosexuality and what role the LGBT play in their church.
If you approve of Christians being heard when silence is asked for out of respect, then do you feel the Westboro Baptist Church people have a right to be heard as well when they picket funerals of fallen soldiers? When the priest or pastor at the funeral asks for a moment of silence, should this form of Christianity have a right to shout obscenities during the moment of silence? Even if you do or do not approve of the message?
Just as it is funny how the ones who call themselves “Christian” and claim to follow Christ are sometimes the ones who act in complete opposition to Christ’s teachings.
Alan,
Thanks for your words … I totally agree with you.
I am a follower of CHRIST first and foremost. I am not perfect but I strive to live out the teachings of JESUS through a balance of truth and grace.
I totally agree that many ‘Christians’ do more harm in the name of GOD than good. I am too trying to stand up and change this within the Church. As for Fred Phelps … to me he isn’t a Christian, or a pastor, nor is his ‘church’ a real church. Westboro is not the type of place CHRIST had in mind when HE set up the Church. In fact that man makes me wanna do un-Christian things 🙂 but I resist cause I know that that’s not how JESUS would respond.
In the end, when all is said and done, GOD has the last say on everything. We are called to be faithful in loving everyone – no matter what.
My heart breaks when teens – both gay and straight – are abused in school by bullys and such. That’s why I participate in the Day of Silence, and I encourage my college and youth ministry to do it as well. The senseless violence has got to stop!
No one’s perfect … that’s why we need the grace of JESUS to make it through each day.
Shawn,
Christians don’t NEED a day emphasizing their ability to speak out. They’ve been plenty outspoken. In the US, the POTUS himself endorsed the conservative evangelical way of thought for 8 years, with both Houses behind him.
But this causes all sorts of problems to come up in public schools. There are no doubt many non-Christians who think that it is inappropriate for a Public school to provide a forum for such outspoken religious preaching. And we’re not talking about some simple expression of diversity: DOT releases PDFs of documents “proving” that Christianity (their form of it) is the ONLY true way; that homosexuals are inherently disordered and susceptible to disease, and that equal rights should NOT be supported on the the grounds that we are diseased, inherently broken, and pitiful.
This isn’t about the Christian “right to speak.” They always have that right. If they hadn’t, I wouldn’t have had the debates I had among my classmates when I was in high school. They DON’T have a right, in a public school, to a captive audience. That is what a CHURCH is for. They also don’t have a right to belittle others or make other students feel threatened in any way. You can bet as a Jew in a Catholic town I would’ve felt threatened if papers and flyers were passed out in homeroom telling me to ask myself if I had the right religion. And I would’ve felt doubly threatened as a same-sex attracted person if flyers were passed around telling me how I was inherently broken and needed to change, even though nothing about it felt “wrong” or “dirty.”
Now, issues regarding sexuality are secular. Every human being has sexuality as a component to them, whether their religion tells them so or not – biology classes will tell them otherwise. That is why a secular event endorsed by a secular organization that happens to be related to sexual orientation and gender identity is acceptable, and in many cases, necessary. The Day of Silence does not call Christians “intolerant, bigoted, and stupid,” even though the Christian DOT calls sexual minorities “broken, disordered, and diseased.” See the inequality going on here? See why people would be confused as to how one could endorse both with a clear conscience?
Emily said:
Some students go so far as to harrass other students – putting tracks in others books or backpacks, interrupting classes by blarring out religious anthems, phone calls, text messaging. All but the text messaging happened to me when I was in high school and college. What I noticed about the brand of Christianity those who harrassed others in school, at least where I went, was that the ministers would encourage these students to do that AND tell them that if others get annoyed by it then that is a sign they are doing God’s will.
Their mindset is that a person will get annoyed by “The Truth.” This, in fact, happened a few years ago with me with a friend who converted to some type of non-Orthodox Christianity. He would yell and scream because I wasn’t getting upset which upset him because if I wasn’t getting upset then apparently he wasn’t preaching the truth. So he finally concluded that I was angry inside and was not allowing my anger to surface; thereby justifying his being annoying. He tried attacking me religiously and it wouldn’t ruffle my feathers. So he would then attack my sexuality. Still no ruffling. So he would switch back to the religious attacks. The last time we talked he was so angry that I wouldn’t get angry back because had I shown just a spark of anger it would have justified his need to be right.
I think religious debates are healthy, not in a public school setting, but allowing two people to debate their faith on neutral ground is a healthy action because it causes each of them to examine what they really believe. It also allows them to find common ground. But there are certain brands of Christianity that preach their brand of Christianity only with their mouths, and they believe the louder they are the more they are in the right. It’s like a traveling medicine man who can pitch a sell for his medicine though he has never taken it himself.
Shawn said:
Whether you agree he is or isn’t a Christian, he claims to be one, and uses the name “Christian” as self-identity. He may not be the type of Christianity you profess, but he is a Christian nonetheless. And his church is a church whether or not it is the type of church you would consider bares the marks of Christianity. The idea isn’t “Will the real Christian please stand up,” but rather “Will those who profess to be Christians actually follow your leader and conduct yourselves according to his standards and not your own.”
Shawn
Well, Christians are being heard loud and clear: they advocate for and support bullying and harassing gay teens and teens perceived as one. They tell all gay teems that the only way they can be safe in school is to hide their identity and live in a lie. keeping up appearances is what Christians are all about. Their message is that not only God hates gays but Christians hate them too and that all attempts to protect gay teem from violence are reason enough for good Christians to march out of schools. After all trying to prevent gay teens from being beating up is “pro homosexual” and all true Christians will happily celebrate and cherish all actions of violence.
The ex-gay frauds are especially active in this advocacy for hatred towards gays, I guess their believe that more gay teens are afraid and horrified, ashamed and in fear for their lives, more their religious scam programs get clients.
I have heard your Christian voice and it all about hatred and loathing and making excuses for stopping all attempts to address the issue of anti-gay violence in schools.
Hope you’re marching proud on top the grave of Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover. You can show how much you support the people who bullied him into death in the name of Jesus.
Advertisment for Day of thruth, made by a church in Illinois:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9d38EoQ9pg
I think that supporting the Day of Truth is supporting violence, harrassment and discrimination against GLBT youth in schools. The whole thing was invented to COUNTER the Day of Silence, which is only asking for an end to harrassment and violence directed toward GLBT youth. There really aren’t two sides to this. One either believes that GLBT students should be allowed to go to school in a safe enviornment, or one believes that they should be required to go to school in an unsafe enviornment.
The DOT sprang from a kid who wore a t-shirt to school on the DOS which said that participants should be “ashamed” among other things. The ADF has used it since to try to force a legal confrontation which is what ADF is all about. Other anti-gay groups latched onto it as another tool to combat the “gay agenda.” Exodus accepted responsibility for it starting this year — who knows why. Perhaps it will give them new sources for donations, but it if nothing else it shows once again that they just don’t get it.
A common slur against the DOS is that one should not be forced to be silent about issues, i.e. “we will not remain silent” etc. It should be obvious to anyone that the “silent protest” is meant as anything but a way to silence discussion, nor has it. It is also not a rigid event, students who wish to joint the protest against violence and bullying are encouraged to work out what works with their school administration and curriculum. As Emily wrote, they may end up being silent only during non-class time.
In the end, the day generates a lot of discussion and debate, and despite the slurs from those opposed to it, has not caused any damaging disruption at all. One could say with certainty that the DOT and those supporting it have caused far more themselves.
The only way to remain intellectually honest about it and support both days is to have no real idea what either is about. And Shawn, this comment from you:
leads me to believe there is the case with you and then some. It is telling that you emphasize a dichotomy between “Christians” and those who support the DOS.
Fg68at:
I watched the video. As I watched, I thought of the following:
First of all, why in black and white? What? Are we still living in the 50s? I was waiting for the Beaver to show up in this film. And only white people in the film? Interesting. Says a lot there already. I don’t understand the reference to “tradition” since everytime I talked to a Bible Christian that’s the first thing they attack about me as an Orthodox Catholic – “Tradition!”
The movie was made in the fear genre for sure.
And the mom putting the tape on her kid’s mouth … I think a lot of parents would be going “YES!” to that. “Can we have two days of silence? Oh, just one?Darn! I got more tape!”
As for what David Roberts said…
You know David, there are just some Christians who won’t shut up. They have not grown enough to understand the value of silence. They think their mouths are blessed by God when it should be their hearts that should be blessed instead. But it’s hard to bless a cold stone. Not impossible, just harder to do.
The Day of Truth on the Day of Silence is like Nazis claiming equal time on Shoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day).
“….because Christians have a right to be heard too?”
Too?!
When, when, when…are the people whose lives are most deeply affected by this new march on gay rights going to GET THEIR TURN?
Too?
As if the freedom to have religious thought, education and congregation in many, many places isn’t ENOUGH?
As if suddenly, since gay people are given more opportunity to learn, teach and speak for themselves, the DOS brigade doesn’t have the grace to not BOGARD the situation at the expense of such and important day?
How many public holidays are conferred for most religious people whether or not they are attending church or temple regularly?
How much accommodation is there already to be among the like minded of your faith without trying to demand MORE accommodation at the expense of gay children or those who are thought to be?
DOS represents the acute URGENCY of what happens to young people. There is torment, violence, death and loss of education.
There are NO such emergencies among people of faith. No members of their communities are harmed in the commission of DOS.
DOT is so graceless and in such BAD faith, and is most representative of the cafeteria style in what people such Christians are the most comfortable with confronting.
Which says a lot about their commitment too.
School is a place of learning, of social interaction and cooperation. Of course.
I just saw a bumper sticker the other day that said “Equality Isn’t A Threat.”
Apparently, the freedom that being unafraid and fully informed is to the powers that support DOT.
I am sorry to have caused such a storm of arguments.
Boris – your accusations are uncalled and certainly not true.
Neither of you know me, nor my heart and story. Yet you have all pre-judged me according to what you have always taken Christians to be.
Am I not entitled to my own opinions? Let it be heard: I do not hate gays or lesbians and I do not promote forced change upon anyone. I do not fully support everything that the DOT stands for (especially the video that Fg68at posted). But in my ministry I want to present both sides of the story – so as not to be accused as being one-sided about the issue.
The Christian side needs to get off of it’s high horse, and learn to truly love and respect gays and lesbians just as JESUS does.
The other side needs to also get off of their high horse, and understand that not all Christians are bigots and bent on killing gays.
I cannot make up for the harsh treatment of some Christians, but I am trying to bridge the gap between both sides. I had hoped you would have seen that.
Yes, Shawn, but you’re still making that false dichotomy: the “Christian” side and the “other” side. The Day of Truth doesn’t represent the Christian side, nor does the Day of Silence represent the other (by which you presumably mean non-Christian) side. There will be plenty of Christians (as well as Jews, atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, etc.) on the side of the Day of Silence, and so there should be. Indeed, all Christians should be in favour of the object of the Day of Silence, which is to fight against something that is wrong irrespective of one’s religious beliefs (or lack of them), viz. the bullying of students who are, or who are surmised to be, LGBT.
Furthermore, as far as the Day of Truth is concerned, I don’t see why anyone should have the right to use the school system to promote an unproven “remedy” for something that isn’t an illness or a disorder in the first place, and the recommended strategy of picking out students who seem to be “loners” or who seem not to “fit in” with the crowd and shoving ex-gay propaganda at them is a breath-takingly presumptuous intrusion into their privacy, which should not be tolerated by the school administration for one moment. Even if, for the sake of argument, one thought that there was a case for such a form of “ministry” – which I most certainly don’t – it’s definitely not an office for school students to arrogate to themselves.
William,
When I said “The Christian side” and “the other side” I am not referring to either the DOS or the DOT. I am simply saying, all Christians and all non-Christians need to get off of their high horses …
Sorry for the confusion.
Well, O.K., Shawn, but if getting off your high horse means endorsing the Day of Truth [sic], then I think I’ll stay mounted, thank you.
Both sides??
Calls for an end to bullying and harrassment of glbt students on the DOS, and calls for harrassment and continued bullying on the DOT. I guess if you stand for nothing, you can stand for everything.
Yes, John, I entirely agree with you. It’s what’s called “facing both ways”.
“Neither of you know me, nor my heart and story. Yet you have all pre-judged me according to what you have always taken Christians to be.”
But Shawn, that’s exactly what the Day of Truth is all about: anti-gay Christians prejudging LGBT youth as broken, sick, and less-than according to what they have always taken gay people to be, without bothering to know them, nor their hearts and stories.
Oh, please Shawn… you support Day of “truth”, a hatefest that has one goal and one goal only: to incite hatred and fear toward gay teens and make their lives in schools as unsafe and miserable as possible. The people you support ask gay teens to remain silent and in fear because otherwise they will be harassed with full support and endorsement by Christianists. People like you who.
And maybe you should ask Carl Joseph Walker Hoover to step down from his high horse… but no, he can’t. because he is dead after bullying, Bullying to what people like you demand schools do nothing about.
You are trampling on corpses with you horse.
There is no bridge. You are my enemy. You are enemy of every gay teen and kid who gets harassed right now, today. You’re spitting on their misery by aligning yourself with the most vicious anti-gay hate groups in existence. Own it and stop whining how you’re being misunderstood.
I really don’t get why this is hard for Shawn to understand, perhaps a little creative contrast?
The Day of Silence is a lot like the International Holocaust Remembrance Day. as described here
(I’m adding bold to those parts that echo the purpose and meaning to the DOS):
These two events have a lot in common, not the least of which is that gays were targeted during the holocaust along with Jews. The other being that homosexuality is more analogous to judiaism – in terms of prejudice, stereotypes, and calls for conversion.
No, i’m not calling anyone a nazi, but in light of the goals of the DOS — what exactly do “Christians” need to respond with anything other than “yes, bullying is bad.”?
To all on here,
I am sorry that what I am saying is offensive and not coming across right. But here is what I am trying to say in a nutshell:
– I FULLY support (and even participate in) the DOS. I FULLY agree that this day needs to be set aside, not just for gay students but for all students who are getting harassed. I do not agree that Christians should protest this day – walk out on this day – or the like. Every race and person needs to honor this day, with deep sincerity.
– What I support of the DOT is this – that we all begin a dialogue about homosexuality. If a person wants to change, that fine. If they don’t, that’s fine too. I do not believe in forcing change on people, or calling gays sick and/or diseased – they are people just like anyone else.
– I do not hate gays and/or want to do harm to gays.
Maybe we just need to agree to disagree … but I do not see anything wrong with what I have said. I see my ministry being no different than New Direction. There needs to be a different response from the Church in regards to gays and lesbians … and as a man who still struggles with male attraction, I am trying to educate the Church in righting their wrongs against the gay community. I am not the enemy here, people. I’m just trying to help. What more do I need to say or do to make everyone understand that?
Again, I’m sorry for causing such a ruckus on here.
Shawn, the aim of the DOT isn’t a dialogue on homosexuality – even if one were needed. Its aim is to push unsolicited ex-gay propaganda at students who are gay, or who are assumed to be gay, and calling it “truth”. That’s not something that we need, least of all in a school.
DOT is not some sort of dialogue on homosexuality. It is a protest against students who participated in the DOS, hoping to end bullying, harrassment and violence directed to GLBT students. If one agrees with the DOS (which has nothing to do with ex-gay therapy, religious beliefs, or anything else), then it would make no sense for a person to have any desire to participate in any way in an event that advocates against the protection of GLBT students in the schools.
Shawn, you aren’t being misunderstood. You aren’t having trouble getting your message out. You are just struggling with your own conflict between believing that everyone should be safe in school, and your alliances with right wing groups running the DOT who don’t share your concern for the safety of LGBT students in our schools.
I would suggest that you ask yourself if you wish to stand with those who believe that no child should be harrassed or victimized in the school system, or would you rather stand with those who don’t mind kids being victimized if it might serve some larger political or religious purpose. For most people, this would be a pretty easy call, regardless of their religious view of homosexuality.
Well, for starters, stop defending/supporting the day of “truth”
If you, for some reason, can’t get behind the simple idea that gay kids, and those perceived as gay, should be able to go to school without fear, intimidation, or violence. Then I don’t know what to tell you. And I don’t think you’re someone we “need” on our side, if this is beyond you.
So the Day of Truth started because a bully decided he’d had enough of this tolerance stuff. What a great way to start a “dialogue”.
And the quote is from the baptist press.
https://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=20459
I read the Baptist News and it said that they are going to have the Day of Truth the day after the Day of Silence. While it’s good to know they won’t interfer on the Day of Silence, I’m still offended by it in many ways. Just the mere fact that they are spreading their brand of Christianity is going to be offensive to many: Catholics, Orthodox, Jews, Muslims, Athiests, etc. Being an Orthodox Catholic, I don’t want that kind of propoganda any more than I want a wart on my butt. And I certainly wouldn’t want to be a student going to school and have to be bombarded with it.
It is also offensive to me because it sends the wrong message of what Christianity at least should be about. But the way I see it, if their lives really reflected Christ’s teachings, they wouldn’t need to wear t-shirts and hand out pamplets. Their lives would be example enough. Whenever someone hands me a religious pamplet or track that’s the first thing I tell them…”What’s the matter? Your life can reflect what you claim to believe?”
The fact that they can’t get it through their heads that every day a child wakes up and fears going to school because they’re going to get taunted and teased, maybe even physically beaten, just because merely accusing someone of being “gay” is justification for such abuse. And that they are perpetuating this abuse in the name of Christianity. And then they cry because they say they are the ones who are really being persecuted. Well, I say, if you can’t act like Christ you’re not going to be treated like him.
To Shawn:
I know you feel like you are under attack, but if you really looked at what these “Christians” are doing for the day of truth you might want to re-examine your position. It’s not that Christianity does not have a right to be heard, but that, Christians who feel compelled to be heard should first align their words with the words and actions of Christ. As a quote claimed to be made by St. Francis says, “Preach the Gospel at all times and only when necessary use words.”
edit:
What’s the matter? Your life can reflect what you claim to believe?”
should read, “What’s the matter? Your life CAN’T reflect what you claim to believe?”
Alan I agree with your comment.
Though we may come from differing sides, this fighting isn’t worth enlarging the gap that CHRIST calls us to close.
I have removed my “endorsement” (or whatever you want to call it) from the DOT – from my site and from further talk. I will continue, as I have always done, to endorse the DOS and the Golden Rule Pledge.
I hope all would see, that truly I am on the side of CHRIST’S love – above and beyond everything else.
Thank you all for your insight.
This has taken me a few days to write, so it is perhaps a bit past its primne, especially since Shawn has pulled away from the Day of Truth. Nonetheless, since I wrote it, I’ll put it forward.
I generally try to stay out of these conversations, because it is tiresome to deal with people who are certain that they have the answers when they don’t even understand the questions, and whose claim to expertise in a matter– especially one like homosexuality– are based entirely on the only fact in their possession: they have ALWAYS claimed this expertise, as they have always claimed expertise in so many matters which they clearly know nothing about.
so I venture to write. This is not an attack, just a restatement of the obvious. When I use the word “religionist”, I do not mean it as a denigration. It’s just shorthand for a group of people who believe that their religious beliefs are in some way a reflection of reality, if not of eternal truth.
Sean, you wrote: “Am I not entitled to my own opinions? Let it be heard: I do not hate gays or lesbians and I do not promote forced change upon anyone. I do not fully support everything that the DOT stands for.” Yes, you are entitled, but the next sentence may or may not be true. Since I don’t know you, I have no way of knowing. The last sentence, however, is untrue. The very idea that this is a Day of Capital-T Truth, and that you can support “some” of it, tells me where you stand and what you believe. Since DOT is not your production, since you are not responsible for its content, your lack of support for “some” of what DOT stands for means nothing.
It’s the same thing that happens when someone tells me they don’t hate me, they just hate my sin. It just allows others to do the hating, while those who love me so much can stand idly by and claim no responsibility for the consequences. It is a win-win for everyone but the victims. Can you say the names of Carl Walker-Hoover or Eric Mohat, and not understand how monstrous is this Day of so-called Truth? The very name is a lie, a corruption, a perversion.
It isn’t even a day. It’s a 24/7/365/12 no-time-off-for-Easter goddamned eternal campaign.
It is not a Day of Truth. It is more accurately a Day of Mere Opinion, and nothing but. A growing number of religionists– not a majority, but a sizable minority– are coming to the conclusion that the traditional “beliefs” about G’s will and homosexuality are yet another in a long sad line of mistaken ideas that have been attributed to G and not to the religionists who have forever remolded G in their own image. “Good” Christians used to burn witches with exactly the same moral certainty (and assumption of superiority) that they understood and did G’s will with which they now attack gay people. How many people were tortured and murdered for that slight mis-apprehension of G’s will? 2000 years of G-sanctioned anti-Semitism (both Jew and Arab) led to the murder of 6 million people, and the mess that is the middle east today. Slavery and segregation have certainly been church-and-bible supported, but only an unashamed racist would admit it today.
Don’t tell me that this is different. It’s not. You just have no historical lens to look at your current position with. You’ve inherited it, very much like racial segregationists inherited their rock-solid certainty about G’s will. Yet another thing that turned out not to be true, though some will cling to it fiercely until they die.
I suspect that these people who are obsessed with homosexuality to the exclusion of all other concerns constitute a very small, but powerful group of religionists. I also suspect that the vast majority of religionists frankly don’t care, and will care only if the former group makes them afraid enough, or excites enough dormant prejudice, to get them to act. And since there is so much money and power at stake– something that almost always seems to attract some religionists– you can bet the incitement will be there. “Render unto Caesar” is yet another inconvenient commandment that is cheerfully ignored.
But the whole idea that being gay and living a gay life is somehow a sin, especially as it is portrayed as the WORST sin, especially displeasing to G, is yet another matter of opinion. So many people are willing to state “The Bible says THIS about homosexuality.” with no biblical or even extra-biblical justification for it. This is because they look at the “relevant” (they are not) biblical passages only through the filters of “these are about homosexuality”, “these are about homosexuality as we understand it today”, “these are clear condemnations”, “we have always been told that these passages refer to homosexuality and therefore it must be true”, and worst of all, “we claim expertise and authority in this matter because we speak for G.”
Funny about that, because if you don’t make those assumptions, if you apply a little bit of logic and perception, and especially, look at what is there is terms of scholarship, a vastly different picture appears. The bible may or may not condemn some aspects of gay sex. It is amazing to me how unclear G manages to be on the subject, when he is so clear on so many other subjects. So coy: “sleep the sleep of a woman” (literally from Leviticus– do you know what it means? I don’t, and neither does anyone else.) to “abusers of themselves with mankind” (KJV on words we don’t know the meaning of. Luther thought it had to do with masturbation, but what did he know?)
If it were as important to G as it is to you, he would have said: “two men or two women together shall not have sex in and way, shape, or form. They will not be naked together and touching each others’ skin. They certainly will not be bumping nasties. Penis into vagina, that’s it. And you shouldn’t enjoy it too much.”
Now, that is clarity befitting the Creator of the Universe. “Sleep the sleep of a woman”? Your guess is as good as mine. G managed to be pretty clear about governing heterosexual behavior. “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” That’s clear, but the opposition to adultery is usually limited to “Tsk Tsk”, not “let’s pass constitutional amendments to make sure your family isn’t recognized as one and your kids don’t get health insurance.”
Perhaps G was just embarrassed to talk about homosexuality, so he couldn’t be clear on it. And I am digressing a bit.
This Day of Truth is not only a Day of Mere Opinion, it is also a Day of Deceit. “Change is Possible”. If that were true, we wouldn’t have or need ex-gays. But let’s see how Change is Possible. Exhibit 1 is chief ex-gay Alan Chambers. (Full disclosure: I don’t know the man and have no wish to. I only know what he says). AC trumpets loud and long that it is possible to change from homo to hetero. He then tells how he has to struggle every day to remain as heterosexual– or if you prefer, chambersexual– as he is. He is clearly not heterosexual, even with a wife and kiddies. He’s a man who has to struggle every day. That’s when he is being honest, not when he says change is possible. He hasn’t changed from homo to hetero, he’s just changed to ex-gay, which seems to mean still-homo-but-trying-to-be-hetero-and-it-isn’t-working.
Here’s Exhibit 2. The Day of Deceit claims that all you need to do is follow Jesus, and you, too will no longer be gay. This premise, that religion in general, but especially, belief in Jesus is the cure to the problem, is as flawed as “Change is Possible”, and ultimately, for the same reason: this isn’t about religious belief. Plenty of religionists, gay and otherwise, believe in Jesus, and Jesus apparently isn’t telling them to change their beliefs or their lives. For some reason he never found any time to mention it. Religions cannot agree about the nature of G and his message to the world. But this is the one thing they are sure about? Obviously, they are not, and will become less so as we progress. We don’t burn witches any more, do we?
They claim that this is a religious problem with a religious answer. Both are self-serving assumptions, and the “religious answer” clearly false. They have yet to produce the slightest bit of evidence that religion is the cure, but they have provided PLENTY of evidence that it is not, as the sorry lives of Lonnie Latham, Ted Haggard, Paul Barnes, and a host of others will attest. Like AC, there have been numerous cases of people claiming they were ‘cured’ by religion and later announcing that they were not: Noe Gutierrez, Peterson Toscano, and Daniel Gonzalez, just to name a few.
Let’s look at the very best evidence we have that “Change is Possible”: the Jones and Yarhouse study. There are more distortions and half-truths around these two than can be counted. They trumpet that their study says “CHANGE IS POSSIBLE”. It then appears that change is possible for only 15%, and that the exact nature of the change is AT BEST difficult to comprehend. And they are ON YOUR SIDE!
They could only find 100 people to participate in their study– 100 out of the tens of thousands that Exodus has claimed to convert. Not a good return rate, especially for people who have found the holy-grail-pot-o-gold-G-honest TRUTH, and have become closer to G as a result. Of those 100, only 15 had managed to change from homo to hetero–so they said– and one of those later recanted. Also not a very good rate of return with people who are highly motivated to change. Of the 14 left, all had experienced a change that the authors described as “ambiguous” and “complicated”. For me as a gay man, my sexuality is very unambiguous and very uncomplicated. For my many straight friends– as far as I know– their heterosexuality is also unambiguous and uncomplicated.
Why, when it was clear from the results of the J&Y study that actual, “uncomplicated” change from hetero to homo does not occur, at least by their methods, why do they advocate change, especially by their methods? If the best that they can come up with are celibates and the “complicateds”, then I put it to you that that something not changed.
For myself, if I knew the emperor had no clothes, I wouldn’t be complimenting him on the pattern of his tie.The only thing that I see in many ex-gays that is unambiguous and uncomplicated is self-hatred.
The problem seems to be simply one of integrity– and most of what passes for integrity in the ex-gay world would be laughed out of court by some fairly slow cub scouts. For me at least, integrity involves being willing to look at myself and ask myself whether I am being 100% truthful, 100% honest, 100% kind, etc, etc etc etc., because that is how I want to be, and that is how I want to be seen by others. I don’t claim to be perfect, but integrity for me involves always striving, as I think Emerson said, “Be whom you would seem to be.”
Which brings me to Exhibit 3. The Day of Truth is not just a Day of Mere Opinion, a Day of Deceit, it is also a Day of Lies: to gay people, to the larger straight world, to everyone, quite possibly, even DOT promoters, though I doubt that. It is not now, nor has it every really been about such undefined and indefinable concepts as Christian truth, morality, G’s word, the Bible, religious freedom, what we teach our children, religion, faith, The Children (TM), marriage, military cohesion, parenting, purity, law, culture, or any other lying rationalization du jour. It never has been for the people who would say: “You’re homosexual. You’re different. We can do whatever we like to you.”
As a Jew, I totally reject the idea that G had a son, and that by “believing” in this son– whatever that means, because it is not at all clear– I will be saved from an eternity of burning torment. This rejection of the ENTIRE THEOLOGY OF CHRISTIANITY bothers no one but the most rabid fundamentalist. There is certainly no Day of Truth directed to Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Mormons, or anyone else. Just gay people. And do you know why? Because if they did, they would look like religious bigots. But let them say it is about gay people, and sex in our deeply Puritanical culture, and there is no fear mongering lie, distortion, half-truth, that they will not claim. Let me reject this TINY bit of conservative Christianity, and all of a sudden, the sky is falling, and everything that these religionists hold dear is suddenly under attack.
Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality. He did suggest strongly that feeding the poor and not judging others would be following his words. How many children died in Darfur while these “good” Christians are attacking me and mine, who have done them no harm, in the name of their religion and morality? A slow 6 year old could see through that crock-o-BS. Personally, all I’m really interested in is getting the same respect from Good Christians (TM) that they extend to all of the other people whom they think are going to burn in hell forever, sent their by your just and loving god because they didn’t happen to hear the ‘good news’, or didn’t think the message was particularly convincing, or even sensical, or happened to be gay, or Jewish, or a ‘witch’, or whatever the reason-du-jour is.
In short, it is not about sincere religious belief. It is simply about what it has always been about: how much the very existence of gay people offends, entices, obsesses, and frightens some straight people, as well as those-who-wanna-be-straight-but-ain’t. Telephone call for Alan Chambers! Calling Bitter, party of 1.
If you are going to talk about sins, what about the everyday sin against gay people exemplified by this Day of Mere Opinion, Deceit, and Lies. I’m sick to death that the course of my life, and my happiness, and those of millions of people just like me, can be subject to uninformed, hateful prejudices, whether or you prefer to call them your religious beliefs or just admit them for what they are. I am equally sick that gay people are imprisoned, attacked, murdered, executed, tortured, used as political fodder, vilified, condemned, persecuted, jailed, slandered, libeled, and accused of all sort of things that are simply NOT TRUE because someone doesn’t approve, or believes their God does not approve. I don’t say that you condone these things. But everytime I hear the phrases “Day of Truth”, “Save the children”, “Protect Marriage” and all the rest, I can see clearly someone who does.
My point is this. Because so much of what the exgay crowd says is bogus, relying on lies, distortions, and half-truths, why should I believe that the “moral” position is suddenly “true” in a way that all of the other points supporting this position are not? Let me repeat: it is not about sincere religious belief. It is simply about what it has always been about: how much the very existence of gay people offends, entices, obsesses, and frightens some straight people, as well as those-who-wanna-be-straight-but-ain’t.
Ben,
Phew! Now breathe.
That was a tour-de-force. I think I’ll keep a copy of it on file for future reference.
TRiG.
LOL. I did indeed breathe.
sometimes, i just like to be clear.
I gave up long ago on getting Ben to be brief, but man, that’s absurd, lol.
Ben, well worth the read. If you have your own blog, please tell me you’re posting this there, and give me an idea on how to find it.
Bravo Ben. Very well said and thought.
Excellent, Ben! I really enjoyed reading this.
I particularly liked your explanation of ex-gay as meaning “still-homo-but-trying-to-be-hetero-and-it-isn’t-working”, which I think almost deserves to be immortalized.
I say “almost”, because I’m sure that the time will come when the term “ex-gay” itself will mean little to the man or woman in the street and will elicit merely a puzzled frown. It will be meaningful only to students of the history of ideas, who will regard the idea of making your sexual orientation change as an eccentric and fascinating oddity of bygone ages, along with things like Creation Science, the Bible Code and Joanna Southcott’s box.
Thank you all for what you had to say– even David. :)Brevity is the soul of wit only when one is being witty. But witty was only a very small part of it. (Chambersexual. Calling Bitter, Party of 1! love it.) i also had a lot to say, and deconstructing the whole proposition of DOT to expose the assumptions and lies takes some time and effort.
I was sorry that I didn’t hear anything from Shawn, because I wrote it mainly for him. He went and did the right thing by withdrawing his endorsement, but I still want him to examine his assumptions. Becuase therein lies the problem.
But I also do this writing for my compatriots. I want people to read this stuff, save it, spread it around, use it. (Give me credit if you publish it). I know i am never going to reach someone irretrievably poisoned by hate or fear or those items disguised as religious belief. But I can reach people who are at least open to re-thinking, like Shawn. Ando our side needs to have a clear understanding in order to stand up and be counted. I think most people are pretty decent, and far more reaosnable on this subject than they are given credit for.
Jason, I always admire whenever you write. You’ve clarified my thinking any number of times. I don’t have my own blog, but I have considered it. Is there a ‘blogging for dummies’ book?
Hi Ben,
I did read your comments. Thanks for the insight. I’m not sure if you know this or not (because some of your comments seemed to imply you didn’t) but up until 8 years ago, I was an active gay man.
I can’t refute your experiences, so I’m not going to. Though, you can’t refute mine regardless how you feel about them. I am under the conviction (not assumption) that change is possible – for those who want it. I am one who wants it.
For me, I believe that in seeking a right relationship with GOD I can’t “have my cake and eat it too” … there’s too much of a compromise there. So, for me I do what JESUS asks of me – to take up my cross and follow HIM.
And my convictions are not old-tales that I just swallowed, rather my convictions have come after many years of personal research from both sides of the argument. In the end (between GOD and I), I came to the conclusion that I couldn’t really justify my actions / gay life with the rest of HIS Word anymore.
This is my experience. It is different than yours. I do not force change on to others, and I never will. Each person has to make the choice in the end. When all is said and done, GOD has the final say anyways.
I pray, everyday, that if my convictions are wrong, then for HIM to show me – so far HE hasn’t. So I stay the course and strive to be obedient.
Shawn– thank you for writing. I’m glad you read what I wrote in the spirit in which it was written. Most of the time I was far less pissed than I might sound. there is anger there, but exposition and logic were of greater concern.
You mentioned that you are ex-gay, so I knew that. I would never try to refute your experiences– they are yours, not mine– but there is a difference between one’s experience and one’s interpretation of it.
I can absolutely respect your decision to make your choices yourself based upon your own experiences and beliefs. But that is not what a lot of your co-religionists are saying, which is, “I believe this, and you must believe it too. If you don’t, I’ll hurt you and tell a lot of lies about you.”
that’s what DOT is about, not Shawn’s personal transformation.
But that makes me ask this question: what exactly is your personal transformation? It sounds to me like you stopped acting a gay man 8 years ago, but your basic nature hasn’t changed. It appears that you are not heterosexual. It also sounds like you have decided that your calling from G is to be literally ex-gay, which is same-sex oriented, not gay acting, not heterosexual. It sounds like an odd calling, but I’m sure G has his reasons. I don’t presume to question it.
But that leads me to this observation. Peterson Toscano is someone I admire, though I don’t know him. The simple humility of Peterson stands as a direct refutation to this nonsense that religion has the slightest expertise in this matter, and that their interpretation of these ancient texts is both accurate and relevant– assumptions, not facts, which I do not share.
He spent 20 years of his life testing this religious solution, only to find it as empty as the promise of an immediate and surprising ability, not to mention the desire, to play a harp for eternity. (As Mark Twain commented, if that isn’t hell, he wouldn’t know what is).
Peterson made the same claim as you– this is what G was calling him to do. But he never changed anything except his mind on this subject. He finally had enough. 20 years in pursuit of a will-o-the-wisp, gone.
One way to look at it was that Peterson was completely clueless. It had nothing to do with G, and everything to do with Peterson’s social conditioning and self image. G couldn’t have cared less. The failure would be completely Peterson’s.
But that is not your framework, so let’s ask the question differently. Another way to look at it is that Peterson did not have sufficient faith in G, that change would happened someday if only Peterson believed hard enough, trusted enough, knew his calling enough. again, The failure was completely Peterson’s, not G’s.
But this begs the final question. G, for his own reasons, sent Peterson a burden to be born, his calling, his plan. I have often heard it said by pious people that G sends us only the burdens we can bear.
If G only sends us the burdens we can bear, we can only assume that if Peterson had been a weaker person, he would now be heterosexual.
I’m not insisting that you and Peterson are identical. neither you nor G have confided in me. But this is hwat i meant when I wrote that there is a difference between one’s experience and one’s interpretation of it.
Hi Ben,
My intention was not to take over this thread, though it appears I have – for that I am sorry.
Ben, I am willing to converse via email if you like – 611ministries@gmail.com.
In answer your questions, I want to first thank you for understanding where I am coming from. You asked about my transformation … simply put, I began seeking after GOD’S identity rather than my own. What I mean is, for so long I was seeking to be “straight” – that was my overall goal. Instead what I was getting was more heartache and confusion. I didn’t understand why GOD wasn’t making me straight – I had the faith but I didn’t have the results.
Long story short, for me, it wasn’t until I began seeking the LORD’S heart and healing that I actually began to understand my struggle and journey. My journey wasn’t about becoming straight, it was about becoming GOD’S son … it wasn’t about finding my own wholeness, but about finding GOD’S wholeness.
This brings up a huge religious debate and such, but I get the feeling that this isn’t the place for that conversation – unless you think otherwise.
I will say this about what scripture says … I have studied much about these debates and have talked (on both sides) to many Bible scholars. After taking many classes and doing Greek research, I have come to solid convictions that what the Bible says is in fact true. I am not saying that I am superior to anyone else, just stating that I have studied this – just as I am sure Pete has too.
Speaking of which, I don’t know Pete other than we are facebook friends. I can’t speak for his story or why things didn’t work out – so to say. I don’t know his relationship with the LORD …. but I would certainly like to get to know him on a more personal level.
As for the label “ex-gay” … I hate it. I do not label myself, and I try not to use it – though sometimes I need to in order to get my points across 🙂 I have since gotten married and I have two great kids. Am I a heterosexual …. not unless straight men lust after guys every once in awhile. Am I gay …. not unless gay men can willingly make love to a woman (which maybe some can, but I couldn’t do it before). So what am I ….. I am a son of GOD. My identity is not wrapped up in my past, present, or future. It is solely wrapped up in GOD.
This, my friend, is where my transformation begins and continues to be.
Shawn; thank you for responding. I understand– probably the clearst I have ever had in the course of these discussions. And an honest one, as well.
If it works for you, believe me, it works for me as well, because I believe you are sincere in understanding the point I was trying to make. It’s your solution, not someone elses.
And back to the thread, DOT is just the opposite.
Shawn,
You may not like the label ex-gay, but what you are describing is Exodus ex-gay down to the last syllable. It is easy to claim not to seek to become straight after such an idea falls under severe scrutiny and support for the possibility is dismally thin. Exodus, too, has migrated from this claim on the exterior, but just as you bring up sexual relations with a woman as a proof, they continue to use opposite-sex marriage and a family as the ultimate goal/evidence internally.
The truth is, of course there are many, many gay men who have been able to make love to women for years. This is not an indication of being straight, but a function of an intense desire to be so for any number of often discussed reasons. It is also, I might add, a formula which leads to so many broken marriages. Marriage to someone of the opposite sex when one is aware of being gay is simply disastrous and unfair. And while you are free to take your life on whatever course you feel best, this will not be a platform for you to make claims which not only have no support, but the striving for which has left so many damaged and faithless (or worse).
Nothing you have said is unfamiliar to most people here. We have seen the cycle, watched the deterioration. However, it has been and continues to be the policy of XGW to recognize the individual’s right to their own convictions and understanding of, in this case, the Christian Bible. If you believe God does not want you to have sex with other men, and you have come to that conclusion through your own study, then don’t have sex with men. But believers of good conscience take different views on this and one simply can’t make it an absolute.
However, when you get into claims of change, there will be little flexibility here at this point. This is where my own conscience as the editor of this blog comes in. I will not, with the evidence at hand, allow claims of change to be stated as though they a) happen in any but the rarest of instances, an b) happen as the result of the efforts or intentions of the individual. The subject is much more complex, but those are basic facts which can be extrapolated from the current data. Could I say tomorrow that I had changed, and probably provide “evidence” of it? Sure, I learned how to do such things earlier in life — basically to stay alive.
But this is not a place to either proselytize or claim divine healing. Most here are on the other side of all that, and to let your comments go unchallenged would be to injure them even more. This is not a therapy group, though some people derive some help from seeing the facts discussed in a relatively safe environment. It is a place to monitor the actions of ex-gay groups and challenge the veracity of their claims. You are welcome to participate in the same way that others do, which includes providing support for claims of fact when stated in a way that requires others to evaluate new information.
And I do not mean to be harsh, but this is not an invitation to continue with point/counter point. We have gone far enough off topic.
Dave,
I fully understand and respect what you said. That is why I started out my last comment the way I did. I was only answering questions directed at me. I did not mean any more than that – especially to bring harm to anyone. If I have, I am sorry.
Thank you for inviting me to continue to participate here.
Shawn
Hi Shawn,
I am wondering, if you had not had all the negative programming growing up, about how bad it was to be born gay, and instead had a positive accepting upbringing, do you think you would have not felt so bad and would have not put yourself through the “exgay” model, potentially having a fulfilling life living your primal template of being homosexual?
Are you gay or bisexual when looking at your developmental years say up to age 20? And if bisexual, is your attraction equal sexually towards men and women? Where does that percentage fall naturally if applicable?
I know you don’t like the label, but it does seem you are living an exgay lifestyle. I like your openness and candor, I wish more in your camp were so resilient and info helpful.
To Ben in Oakland: thank you for saying what I was thinking – you can call it what you want, but DOT is really “Day of Mere Opinion”- and/or DOL -Day of Lies.
I still never cease to marvel at the fact that ANYONE would support DOT- Theist or non! (Idon’t care of someone is atheist, agnostic, Hindu, Buddhist, Wiccan, Jewish, Muslim, or Christian)that would intelligently support the right of ANYONE to bully-in THIS nation. (or frankly in ANY nation!)
1) it interferes with the victim’s right to life, liberty AND the pursuit of HAPPINESS!
2)it is simply NOT the truth that is being expressed-
3)seems to me if Jesus was THAT concerned about it, He would have said something About -“it”- HE DIDN’T
4) I find it odd that ANYONE could suport bullying with an ounce of common sense-
5) As for the free speech argument, I agree, even Mr. Phelps has the right to express his opinon- BUT, he does not have the right to cause emotional, or physical harm, just as no one has the right to free speech when they yell fire on a crowded theater when there is no fire. I wish one Christian could tell me logically, and Scripturally why bullying is OK- Still have not heard or read a reasonable, or intelligent reponse to that!
I am 56 years old, and I grew up in those Beaver Cleaver days- at least where I grew up, people got along better and respected one another’s beliefs without having to agree with them. We live all together in my town, RC, Protestanst of several stripes, Greek and Russian Orthodox and Jewish, and yes, even atheist- the atheist family in our town were some of the most upstanding, kind people I knew, and it would have put many so-called Christians to shame. Still does, how sad!
Bullying was not tolerated in our public schools for ANY reason,. So I have to ask myself, why is it that these days, many (not all) “Christians” have lost that love and gentle demeanor. Why is that? God has not changed, Jesus ‘s teachings have not changed, so why do I see so much hate (not free speech, hate) from so many people calling themselves Christians? Isn’ using the name of God to justify hate of any kind a manner of taking God’s Name in vain? Why with all the LARGER issues, are some of these people so obssessed with what I do or don’t do in my sex life? Too much time on their hands? Easier to judge than actually work out one’s salvation in fear and trembling? Or is it just that bullying begets bullies- and the current generation are filledwith undisciplined bullies from past days? Hmmm, I wonder….
Peace to all here!
Hugs
Bill
Hey all,
I just wanted to say thanks for the information about Beyond Ex-Gay and such. Someone sent me a letter with information that offered some good insight into things … though the envelope didn’t have a return address on it, nor was there a message inside telling me who it was from.
So – cause I don’t know who sent it – I just wanted to say thanks (seriously).
Shawn