“Straight talking” Stephen Bennett explains precautions listeners should take when evangelizing to “the homosexual.” (11.23.05 Real Audio / Windows Media)
(+11:25) Stephen: I believe homosexual men need rock solid Bible believing Christian men to show them what real Christian male non sexual love is all about and Godly male Christian affirmation and encouragement through God’s word. Lesbians in turn need a Christian female to show them what real nonsexual Christian love is all about as well. However I always encourage these friendships with homosexuals if possible be with a husband and wife for precautionary measures. Many homosexuals can perceive this love, attention and affection that they’re receiving as sexual and sometimes will become emotionally codependent with their Christian friends. The opposite sex partner of the Christian married couple provides that safe important boundary. If the Christian is not married it might be best to bring another man along when befriending a homosexual male or another woman when befriending a lesbian individual.
The part of this that most offends me (out of a buffet table full of things) is this:
“to show them what real Christian male non sexual love is all about”.
The idea that having strongly felt, but nonsexualized, love for another man – what
most of us call ‘friendship’ – is foreign to
my experience as a gay man is both misinformed
and offensive. Perhaps when these ‘ex-gays’ were living their pathetic, shadowy half-lives under Satan’s domination*, they had no real friendships with other men; from this, they extrapolate that _all_ gay men have the same problem.
Dreadful, just dreadful.
*Parodistic intent; not to be taken literally (or internally)
Bennett is either a con with a gig (as raj implies) or a raving lunatic out of touch with reality. Either way, the man and his followers embody a sense of evil. Only can only hope that he shakes it off before the next life.
I say treat him as no more seriously than those homeless “prophets” shouting revelations of doom. The same goes with the people who listen and actually agree to his virtol.
Bennett has decided to celebrate Christmas as a holiday cake, not only fruity but very very nutty.
Xeno:
Bennett is either a con with a gig (as raj implies) or a raving lunatic out of touch with reality.
Just to clarify, raj (me) has not implied it. Raj (me) has pretty much stated it explicitly. Although I would use the term “con man” rather than “con”, since the latter suggests that he was convicted of a crime, whereas the former does not.
If Bennett can, indeed, sing, he should sing. There are a number of excellent gospel songs from a number of religious traditions that he could sing. What does he go around with his psycho-analysing about gay people? I suspect it’s because he can’t sing, and so he needs a different–gig–to differentiate himself from those people who actually can carry a note. I am not going to waste my time trying to listen to his singing, but I really suspect that that is correct.
I doubt very seriously that Bennett is a lunatic out of touch with reality. The people who support him are the lunatics who are out of touch with reality. He figured out the “greater fool theory,” that one can make a lot of money out of the “greater fools”–that is, the lower parts of the feeding trough. I learned that about 25 years ago when we used to go to antique shows. Long story. Short story is that antique dealers a few decades ago used to deal among themselves to try to “raise the prices” of antiques, and then try to pawn them off onto unsuspecting rubes (which we were at the time). After a while, the fraud became clear. I don’t know whether the antique shows are still taking place, but we haven’t attended any.
“I believe homosexual men need rock solid Bible believing Christian men…”
No Episcopalians need apply. No Presbyterians, unless from the Plains States. Quakers are definetly out. Jews, bad roll models. And as far as Church of Christ, keep ’em from the homos.
No, what homosexual men need are good Southern Baptist, especially those from North Carolina where they’ve made it clear that gay-accepting churches are “not in fellowship”.
“…to show them what real Christian male non sexual love is all about”
As opposed to real Christian male sexual love. That’s what gay men find with their husbands on a lazy Sunday afternoon when they get home from church and before they go off to choir practice.
I can understand Bennett’s point about bringing a spouse along. I certainly know what I would assume if Stephen Bennett wanted to spend time alone with me.
“Sure, Stephen, I like doing manly things (get your hand off my leg). And real Christian love is great (don’t touch me there). But I’m kind of busy lately (stop staring at my crotch) so I probably won’t have time to hang out.”
“The opposite sex partner of the Christian married couple provides that safe important boundary. If the Christian is not married it might be best to bring another man along when befriending a homosexual male or another woman when befriending a lesbian individual.”
Oh for crying out loud.
Priceless.
JFK (jesus frigging khrist) several days in a row? He apparently can’t sing. And he apparently can’t dance. But he can apparently can bash gay people.
Bennett sounds like a “one-note charley.”
Did anyone happen notice on the straight talk website that each days comments on that day’s show are all made by the same Susan Smith? Is she the only one listening to this rubbish! Could she be the producer, Stephen’s drag name?
Most of my friends are married straight couples. It’s a shame I can’t get the husbands away so I can hit on their wives. As a practicing lesbian, I am eager to hump every double X individual whose path I cross. Practice makes perfect.
I guess gay Jews are just plain damned.
Timothy said: “Sure, Stephen, I like doing manly things (get your hand off my leg). And real Christian love is great (don’t touch me there). But I’m kind of busy lately (stop staring at my crotch) so I probably won’t have time to hang out.”
Man, did I need that laugh!
David
It is lost on Mr. Bennett that when you get to know someone because they are your evangelization project you are not befriending them. How do you forge an honest friendship on ulterior motives? This is how members of cults behave.
This man is so unbelievably STUPID!!!
Gay people are BORN into FAMILIES. They have siblings, cousins…uncles and aunts who are straight and provide non sexual love and friendship.
The mixed hetero/homosexual situation that provides (or should) for non sexual same gender emotional bonding and development is already established.
It’s friggin’ BUILT in!
This is an ingenius situation that the universe created and only stupid people (or those of evil intent themselves) would calculate as sinister or worth hurting innocents over.
That is a projection of their own weakness or need to control what THEY don’t really want to know fully.
It’s an obvious truth, not opinon, that regardless of family structure, culture, religion or country you are born in…being gay will happen.
There is no genetic anomoly or DNA differences from family to family that requires you will have parental origins to determine your sexuality.
A person with a brain can look at all these stupid THEORIES that people like Bennett cook up and just go DUH!!!
Whatever you believe is responsible for our creation as gay or not, has shown that being gay doesn’t have any determinable origins or requires changing.
Or it wouldn’t require brutal means to change if it was possible. It doesn’t mean change is possible, it just means that terrible practices can make someone not reveal or want it.
Big difference.
Just be decent and fair and the rest reveals itself.
Even our culture having been indecent and unfair to gay people has shown that the heterosexual majority is squandering a remarkably able and compassionate minority.
So why keep doing it?
How incredibly STUPID and wasteful is that?!
When a person goes from gay to RABIDLY anti gay…it’s more of an extension of something else unhealthy.
Just a matter of swinging from one extreme to another.
Sadly, Regan, Mr. Bennett’s “wisdom” or what passes for it, is about the most one could expect from the south end of a north-facing horse.
Phil at November 24, 2005 02:05 PM
That’s precious!!!!!
Good one, Phil!
What I see Bennett saying here, solid Christian same-sex friends, is the same thing I was told twenty years ago when I was involved with the ex-gay movement. It’s all a part of their theoretical perspective on homosexuality. They belived back then that homosexuality was caused by an inability to receive love from and bond with the same-sex parent. Hence, healing comes through healthy same-sex relationships (as well as dealing with parental issues). However, science is giving us more and more to think about in terms of brain structure, genetics, and socialization (see Ryan D. Johnson’s article, Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture, AllPsych Online, 2003. http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html).
Sadly, this kind of scientific information is largely ignored, downplayed or attacked by the ex-gay movement. For an example, if you’re comfortable going onto the Exodus site, see the article http://www.exodus-international.org/news_2005_0211.shtml. (The journal article they refer to is Mustanski, B. S., Dupree, M. G., Nievergelt, C. M., Bocklandt, S., Schork, N. J., & Hamer, D. H. (2005). A genomewide scan of male sexual orientation. Human Genetics, 116, 272-278.)
I do want to say that when I left the ex-gay movement and started to come out, I was struck by the fact that virtually everyone I knew from various Exodus ministries was, as far as I could tell, sincere. There were those who used their position for their own purposes, but that happens everywhere. I have not listened to any of Bennett’s broadcasts, but I have to start by believing that his intentions are sincere, even though his information and, therefore, his message are misguided.
In order to find the anomalous evidence supporting their anti-gay beliefs religious people like Chambers have to sort through and ignore the vast majority of evidence which shows they are wrong. I can’t believe they can do this (and they must) and be sincere at the same time.
Because at some point all religious texts contradict themselves and there have been thousands of religions and at best only one could possibly be inerrantly correct I find it impossible to believe that any religious fundamentalist sincerely believes their religion must be the one that is – even they must acknowledge that it is the historical nature of most religions to be at least partly wrong and they have no logic beyond accident of birthplace to believe their religion is the one exception to the rule.
Randi, of course they believe their religion is partly wrong. All that junk about love and tolerance, for instance–that clearly wasn’t what Jesus meant to put in there.
The religious right starts with dogma, and then spends their energy looking for the science to support it, discrediting any science that seems to get in their way. There must be many reasons that people seek out such black and white answers. When I was growing up, my dad (conservative Lutheran pastor) taught a very black and white approach to scripture and life. I RARELY saw him get angry. When he did, it was because someone was contradicting or questioning his dogma. He got angry at me more than once for trying to critically grapple with some issue of faith. I think he was thinking that I was questioning his authority or questioning scripture. I was indoctrinated into a very black and white way of thinking. In fact, when I was college age, if someone asked me a question more complicated than simple facts, I spent a lot of energy trying to figure out what they were looking for, what should I say to please them, rather than using my God given critical thinking skills. (Yeah, I’m still a man of faith.)
Black and white dogma; needing to have all the answers clearly spelled out and labeled: My opinion is that this is all a form of control. I think for many people, their faith is based, at least in part, in a fear of hell. When you’re living in fear, you try to find ways to control the environment around you to make it safer. Black and white answers provide the kind of structure that a person living in fear can deal with.
But if being so black and white is really about control, then we should remember that trying to control others is the heart of abuse, whether that be physical, emotional, spiritual, or other kinds of abuse. (See http://www.safehavenshelter.org/dva/PCwheel.html, or google the words abuse control and click on images for other sites with the same wheel. Keep in mind that while the victim of abuse is referred to as she in this chart, people experiencing abuse can be male as well. For more about abuse, go to http://www.verbalabuse.com/10.shtml.)
It can be hard for those of us who came out of such black and white homes to reframe our experience as control and abuse. It may be that we need to sort that out with someone like a counselor or clergy person.
So if we re-frame at least some forms of indoctrination as abuse, then the dogmatic “teacher/leader/parent/pastor/etc.” becomes the abuser. We have heard often that many of those who perpetrate abuse grew up in an abusive home. (see http://www.lapdonline.org/bldg_safer_comms/tip_of_the_month/07_tip.htm).
That brings us back to the question of living in fear, which leads to attempts to control, including a black and white view of the world and a dogmatic view of religion. Those are my thoughts on why they cling so desperately to something so illogical.
My final comment is that I am a man of faith today for the most part because of the role my parents played in bringing me to faith. Not all of that experience was dogmatic and controlling. This is where it becomes sticky for us. We do recognize the good that has been done in our lives, but we can’t use that to excuse or minimize any damage we may have experienced. We need to recognize both in order to move on well.
Skemono – how ironic, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Its not possible to tolerate such intellectual contradictions and say the stand is honest, fair, or principled, or sincere. That’s evil to me.
“
Moderate Christians don’t believe they have the right to be trivially happier by blindly forcing every individual to supress same sex attractions that are not chosen and can bring two individuals to support each other.
There isn’t anything under sun and stars about gay people that isn’t easy to learn about.
Heterosexual standards change, weaken or are impossibly raised against gay people alone, and not themselves.
Constantly changing their own rules, exacts no fairness or commitment to what’s right on their part.
The standard now is to be in denial, lie about the intentions of gay people…or challenge the argument with what can’t be proven or argued.
Which is the existence of God or God’s intentions:
that is, as long as those intentions are in THEIR favor.
And that is simply by being a majority, not superior as human beings.
Opinion long ago crashed into facts about gay people.
Dues must be paid by heterosexuals and the debt is their considerable conceit that heterosexuality is the only orientation there is and the only one desirable, to gay people as well.
Were that true:
Then no extraordinary, intense and violent measures would be necessary to halt the presence of gay people.
Let alone the potential to do good.
The distinctions between gay and straight people would be a natural occurence not an unnatural social construct enforced by brutality and isolation and negative conditioning in young gay people.
In truth seeking and truth telling:
You can’t say an outcome is the truth, when three unfettered opponents challenge the one brought in chains, to an arena too small to move around in.
A thought on belief:
Of course people think that what they believe is right. That’s a self-defining statement. If you didn’t think it was right, you wouldn’t believe it.
A thoughtful person allows for challenges to their beliefs. Either it strengthens their position or allows for growth. Evolving beliefs is not a sign of insincerity, but rather of thoughtful reflection.
A principled person does not disavow their beliefs at the first sign of contradiction. Rather they weigh the contrary evidence to see if it will hold up over time.
Much of Christianity is in flux over the issues of sexuality, and particularly over homosexuality. While to us the change may seem a snails pace, in context of change in religious dogma, it has been lightning fast, a mere 30 to 40 years.
There are those who are unwilling to consider evidence that does not conform to their beliefs. They simply refuse to believe that gay people exist, as such. By choosing to believe that homosexuals are simply flawed heterosexuals, they alleviate any conflict in their belief structure. These are, of course, those who are weakest in their faith, not able to measure it against reality. They fear that that if homosexuals are innately immutably gay then their anti-gay positions are in conflict with their perceptions of themselves as loving, and they are unwilling to give up either their biases or their self perceptions.
Others, however, are just not there yet. There are a great many Christians, even fundamentalists, who are in conflict. I don’t fault these people for not immediately recognizing that equality, fairness, and decency to gay people is the Christian way of life. The concept of a gay person is fairly new to many of them; and the perception of a moral gay person is even newer. They need some time to process this. After all, those quickest to abandon one set of beliefs will be the ones quickest to revert back at the slightest pressure.
These inbetweeners tend to say things like “well, the Bible says it’s a sin, but we are all sinners” or “we need to show compassion and offer hope to homosexuals”. They are simply waiting for their conflict to resolve itself. Yes, Joe and Johnny are good people and seem to love each other, and Sue and Sally are always at church and seem to love God. But the society and the church have always had a different position. Lets talk it out for a few decades and see what should be done.
These folks, though they are approachable over time, seem to either challenge gay rights to find out how far they are ready to move, or they take a wait and see position and hold onto their anti-gay position in the meanwhile.
The difficulty is in figuring out if the person challenging you is being anti-gay out of intractability, and is a hopeless cause, or if they are truly challenging you and listening to your reply.
For example, for years Jerry Falwell was rabidly anti-gay. And then about the time everyone else jumped on board, he backed off a little. He now is apparently in favor of anti-discrimination laws for housing and employment. I would never have guessed him to be flexible at all. That isn’t to say that he hasn’t moved as far as he can, but simply to suggest that many of those now campaigning against us may some day be our champions and this will come about not in spite of their religious nature but because of it.
Yew talk purdy, Mister. I hope you’re right Timothy and that it doesn’t take another 30 or 40 years. I think equality can be largely achieved in 5 or 10 years in western democracies and that will be a shining beacon to the rest of the world of morality based on fairness and equality. O Canada…
Randi,
you and I are both hoping for 5 to 10… but if it takes another 40, that’s not such a long time in the grand scheme of things (though I’ll either be pretty old or not around to see it).
And yep, Canada gives hope. As does the Scandinavian countries, Britain (where it seems that absolutely everyone calls their civil unions “marriage” and is OK with it), Spain, and various other odd and unexpected places like Buenos Ares and parts of Brazil.
Just to let you all know, I doubt that the US has 40 more years of hegemony. Basic science is going abroad, as is much of manufacturing. Much of “Hollywood” is produced in Canada, London, Prague and Hungary. Basic staples such as electronic products may be designed in the US (although Nokia cellphones are being designed in Finland and Samsung cellphones in–I believe–South Korea), but they are being produced in the far east for sale throughout the world.
And, in the case of ostensibly US companies, the profits are repatriated to the Cayman Islands tax haven.
If the US gov’t continues along its current path, it will bankrupt the US in less than 40 years. The British government did something similar (as did the Spanish government before them).
If you don’t want to buy Euros, at least internationalize your investments, and learn a foreign language.
Timothy: As does the Scandinavian countries, Britain (where it seems that absolutely everyone calls their civil unions “marriage” and is OK with it), Spain, and various other odd and unexpected places like Buenos Ares and parts of Brazil.
It is only the rapidly ageing post-Christian population that supports the liberal establishment. The new European immigrants (and their native born children) are more likely to say “kill the queers”. In 40 years time I wouldn’t count on gay couples still getting married in Eurabia. Stoned to death maybe.
Just a little commentary on my part…there’s a local church here in Oklahoma that has a sign out front that made me quite happy:
Love means accepting, not condemning.
Seeing as how I’m surrounded by Southern Baptists, including my own father, it’s tough to be constantly badgered about the way I live. But little things like that make my day.
FYI… I made some comments during the weekend, and they were held by the system to be approved since I’m a new user. When posted, they showed up at the time I had posted them, rather than the end of the list, so could be easily overlooked if you’re checking this list regularly. Oddly, for some reason, my first posting went through with no problem. To see my second one about faith and spiritual abuse, scroll up to November 26, 2005 05:19 PM. Thanks, Tim
Welcome, Tim, just so people don’t confuse the 2 Tim’s, I’ll start using my last initial.
Posted by: Tim at November 26, 2005 05:19 PM
That was really helpful, Tim.
Thanks Randi and Tim W. Tim… to make things clearer, I’ll use my last initial too. From now on you’ll see me as TimM.
Another thought; one of the most important things I learned from Soulforce (www.soulforce.org):
They (the people who live in the black and white world, who would terrorize us with 6 or 7 Bible verses) are victims of the same lies which we have been victims of.
TimM
Hi Tim,
I’m not sure which Tim to post this to, but it’s the one who made a statement on one’s beliefs and believing they are right.
Is this BECAUSE of their belief, or they think that having a belief MAKES them right?
The ‘we’re all sinners’ mantra rings hollow when behaviors that betray and destroy are not distinguished from simply being a difference in behavior.
These sins are not punished and those who commit them are not excluded or discriminated against for creating and maintaining a family, or a job or where they or their children are allowed to socialize in peace.
For example:
Bennetton ‘United Colors” sweater company based in Italy, had an anti death penalty ad that featured death row inmates in soft focus and with one line quotes like ‘hug your kids more often’.
Pope John Paul II praised the ad campaign and followed up with a commendation to Bennetton.
An ad featuring two men, one reclining on a couch and the other hovering over him as a prelude to a kiss, was condemned by Ratzinger and some citizens of Italy.
And remember when Pope JP issued a letter from the Vatican stating that children adopted by gay couples was ‘doing a violence’ to them.
People who were ACTUALLY violent to children get acceptance as poster boys for forgiveness, even the guy that SHOT the Pope was forgiven and released from prison.
But somehow gay couples or two men about to kiss is worse?!
Adulterers, and parents abusive and neglectful of their children can marry once and again and again.
But a gay couple who do no such thing, don’t have that option at all.
An incarcerated or condemned heterosexual can marry, but a free, talented and contributing gay person cannot.
We have to be consistent and understand what sin is, and make damn sure what sins we’re going to continue to tolerate, regardless of how destructive and whose is simply a matter of difference that hurts no one and enables the ‘sinner’ to do MORE good with their lives.
Belief is just that, and a belief can be WRONG too.
Like being Aryan and killing millions of Jews made you the ‘master race’.
Like the belief in the superiority of white people over people of color, men over women or straight over gay.
I’m sick of straight religious people demanding sainthood from gay people, while allowing their own, so to speak, to do whatever.
Just because you don’t want to think you’re wrong, doesn’t mean you aren’t.
There is a clear wrong here. We’re just witnessing denial, ignorance and cowardice.
Straight people would rather sacrifice their own child to their beliefs, than the belief itself.
And I’m the very impudent one who would demand to know how they could do that, and think that’s at all right.
That was good, Regan. Thankyou for that perspective.
I’m sick of straight religious people demanding sainthood from gay people, while allowing their own, so to speak, to do whatever.
Um, yes.
I don’t have the exact text, but a few years ago, I heard a comic recite a story about an elderly lady attending church. (This was in the US) She liked to chew chewing tobacco. In the sermon, the preacher went through a litany of bad things that people could engage in, and, with each thing, she would yell “amen.” When the preacher finally got to chewing chewing tobacco, she grumbled “now he’s meddling.”
That’s pretty much true. We want our own little “vices,” but we want to deny others their own little “vices.”
Regan, there is a lot of honesty in what you wrote and I like your perspective. I think the key to the problem you describe is:
I’m sick of straight religious people demanding sainthood from gay people…
It’s not the responsibility of a Christian (or to my understanding any person of faith) to demand anything of anyone (except perhaps themselves). To do so invokes the familiar question “why do you look for the spec in your brother’s eye while ignoring the log in your own” (my paraphrase). I agree that it is sad so many do.
David
Regan, you said it well. They want to label us and tar and feather us with a brush that will never be used on them since the brush is for gay people only.
They want to call us promiscuous, and many of us are. But when we look for the right to make a commitment, they block us. They don’t want to see us as anything other than promiscuous perverts. It’s interesting. My state is facing this issue, and will probably enact a constitutional ammendment that bans our right to marry or to have a civil union. The only right left to us will be the right to have sex with whomever we want to; the one thing most hateful to them.
Your closing line, “Straight people would rather sacrifice their own child to their beliefs, than the belief itself,” really hit me. I guess I feel like that’s what happened in my life.
One Bible verse that really has helped me follows. Like I said, I’m a guy of faith, so stuff like this is important to me. In it, Jesus is talking to the crowds about the religious leaders. In Matt. 23:3-4 Jesus says:
…therefore, do whatever they (religious leaders) teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling to lift a finger to move them…
The first time I saw that, it was like a breath of fresh air. I realized that the church, today, ties up a burden too heavy to bear, and places it on the shoulders of young (and not so young) LGBT folk, and then does nothing to support us.
Personally, I’ve moved on and found a church willing to accept and support.
TimM