Ex-Gay Watch

Debbie Thurman and Randy Thomas have been been battling against the human-rights campaign in Uganda since March. Even now, at Warren Throckmorton’s blog, she defends the “Christian” spirit behind the Uganda legislation and she seems to be opposed only to the death penalty — if that.

Mike, one day you will have to give an account for that blatant and evil lie. What drives you to such divisiveness is beyond me. And Dave knows full well it is a lie. He can step up here and do the right thing. Will he? I came into this discussion because I actually believed something fruitful might come of it. Dave, you had me believing that. Was I dead wrong? Mike’s comment is beyond the pale, even for him.

And Dave, the comment I made about my role in the Uganda anti-homosexuality bill protest, or however we wish to refer to it, was speaking to the events that led up to Warren Throckmorton creating his Facebook group and folks beginning to find concrete ways to speak out. I did research and provided the first contacts for response to the bill. And a lot more besides. It’s on the record at Warrren’s blog. But it doesn’t matter. All anyone seems to want to do here is bite the hand that attempts to reach out. So, I am a hypocrite now. That’s sweet. Thanks.

I will take my lumps where they are merited. I’ve humbled myself before, and will likely have to do so again. It’s called life. In the heat of battle (debate), we all say things that would have been better left unsaid. Please forgive me if I caused unmerited pain with any of my words. Realize that there is a kind of sorrow we are all meant to know, one of convicting insight in our spirits. God will have to judge which is which here. But this is the point in the discussion where we are called to look beyond that, to rise to our “better angels,” to the extent that we have them.

My prayers upon awaking this morning were for you, Dave, and Regan, specifically, above all others. They were Spirit-directed. I truly bear you no ill-will. I am called to walk in a way that brings honor and glory to God. My words will not always be dripping with honey as I defend my faith and His truth. The word of truth is a two-edged sword, or as the author of Hebrews puts it, a scalpel surgically dividing good from bad. That’s the tough part. Compassion bids me to forgive and seek reconciliation after the conflict. That’s the love part. You are free to believe that or reject it. Your choice.

Grace, mercy and peace to you.

Debbie,

When it was announced that a Wanted ad had appeared in The Monitor (not the first time this has happened, by the way), you spoke in vague terms of washing your hands of Uganda and focusing on issues at home. Whatever your intent, the manner in which you expressed it was all too typically ambiguous, given your and Randy’s other vague statements.

Much of your discussion here at XGW has also danced around any concrete position.

Please state unambiguously your exact position on every element of the Uganda legislation. What punishments do you oppose, what punishments do you support, and to what extent do you acknowledge that U.S. ex-gay activists helped launch this campaign.

And stop portraying yourself as a victim here. Your self-pity is shameful. The real victims here are the Ugandan people — and the “Christians” who will be judged by God for their hatred and violence against fellow men.

When it was announced that a Wanted ad had appeared in The Monitor (not the first time this has happened, by the way), you spoke in vague terms of washing your hands of Uganda and focusing on issues at home. Whatever your intent, the manner in which you expressed it was all too typically ambiguous, given your and Randy’s other vague statements.

OK, Mike. Since you asked, here is precisely what I said in that comment:

(In reference to the ad): Or maybe it’s a joke or a fight-back tactic of gays in Uganda (or elsewhere) to prove “it’s already happening.”

You know, I’ve gotta say, the world suddenly changed again for me after the Fort Hood attack and some other ponderings.

(Paragraph here deleted, as it is essentially a repeat of the World Help CauseLife information I’ve already mentioned here)

Today is the Marine Corps birthday (we’re 234) and tomorrow is Veteran’s Day. My heart right now is heavy for the servicemen and women, some of whom had already laid their lives on the line in Iraq or Afghanistan, no doubt doing compassionate acts for children in both countries, who were brutally gunned down within the confines of an Army base on our own soil last week by one who was supposed to be their brother-in-arms.

In other words, there is much in this world that is wrong. Much suffering, must darkness, much political correctness and knee-jerk activism and too little real compassion and sacrifice. And, as one pundit said, suddenly we’re more concerned about jihadists than gays in our military.

I have great compassion for those who struggle with homosexuality because I’ve walked that road, too. It is my prayer that we could treat all people — gay, straight, of all racial backgrounds and philosophies — with dignity, no matter where they are. If any of those people rise up against us to do us harm, all bets are off, however.

Today, Uganda can fight its own battles. I’d rather be on my knees before God and take up arms (figuratively) at home.

Folks can read the comment here, if they want to.

As you, and those who I hope can read better than you do, can see, I said my heart was heavy because of the Fort Hood slaughter, and on that day, it precluded my speaking out on Uganda. As it should have.

The next day (yesterday), I came back to resume that campaign, to do what I have been doing for the past several weeks.

But let’s not stop there, Mike. Let’s keep going, as you have more questions and still seem to be reading-challenged.

Please state unambiguously your exact position on every element of the Uganda legislation. What punishments do you oppose, what punishments do you support, and to what extent do you acknowledge that U.S. ex-gay activists helped launch this campaign.

1. I am opposed to the bill, period. I do not support criminalization of homosexual behavior. Just as you do (I presume), I decry any predatory sexual activity, against minors or anyone, straight or gay. Let Uganda address that with fair laws.

2. I do not support Martin Ssempa, Stephen Langa or any religious or government leader in Uganda who backs this bill. They do not represent the Church or the tenets of Christianity. I don’t have the time to take you to the various places where I have publicly spoken out against this, to include on my own blog. Even GayUganda knows where I stand. How come you don’t?

3. Let me reiterate, since you seem to need things repeated, Mike. I am opposed to ALL of the bill. Period.

Any more questions?

And, I am no victim, Mike. Not here or anywhere. I am hated, but I am not a victim because of it. Never.

Debbie,

This will be short.

I have great compassion for those who struggle with homosexuality because I’ve walked that road, too.

Herein lies the problem. Gays only struggle because they (we) are continually told that we are “less than” and “wrong” and “have made a bad choice” and “must change.”

And those charges come from “Christians”, chief among them the ex-gay groups.

Without the (inaccurately applied) Bible based prejudices (against what is a natural condition) from which the social prejudices arose, there would be no problem.

Gays only struggle because they (we) are continually told that we are “less than” and “wrong” and “have made a bad choice” and “must change.”

I struggled, and no one ever told me that. I inherently knew it would not work for me. Yes, there is plenty of ex-gay self-righteousness out there. There is also the gay variety. It’s no respecter of sides.

I struggled, and no one ever told me that. I inherently knew it would not work for me.

Fine, Debbie. Only you can know what you knew. But this brings us to the nub or crux of the matter.

Do you feel obliged to tell everyone else who is gay, or who thinks that they may be gay, that it won’t “work” for them either? If so, why?

What about those for whom it clearly is “working”? Do you feel obliged to tell them that it shouldn’t be “working” for them? If they are happy as they are, do you think that it is your right or duty to try to persuade them that they shouldn’t be happy?

Do you feel obliged to tell everyone else who is gay, or who thinks that they may be gay, that it won’t “work” for them either?

No.

What about those for whom it clearly is “working”? Do you feel obliged to tell them that it shouldn’t be “working” for them?

No.

If they are happy as they are, do you think that it is your right or duty to try to persuade them that they shouldn’t be happy?

No.

Clear enough? I have said this multiple times, in multiple places.

Thank you for clarifying those points, Debbie.

Thank you for clarifying those points, Debbie.

You’re quite welcome.

Debbie,

I inherently knew it would not work for me.

Of course, as you pointed out, I don’t know you. But your “inherent” knowledge came from somewhere. That is, from the way you saw homosexuality viewed by society, or from the “societal norm” of man and woman that you saw around you with no out and happy (perhaps married) gay couples. So, you inherently knew it would not work for you to be “different.”

Things might have been different if you had had positive gay role models. Fortunately for today’s youth, there is plenty of gay culture and positive role models for them to absorb. No need to change. Their inherent orientation is something they can be happy with.

Just a guess, since I don’t know you.

Of course, as you pointed out, I don’t know you. But your “inherent” knowledge came from somewhere.

It came from the law God had written on my heart, to put it in biblical terms you may or may not relate to. I broke that law, suffered the associated pain of my rebellion, and was reconciled again to both God and my husband.

Things might have been different if you had had positive gay role models.

I don’t think so. But I honestly can’t say how it might have been for me had I been born 30 years later or had I been confronted with a strong, mutual, same-sex attraction in my younger years. I was as vulnerable as the next person. Given how I feel about my life and who I am today, I know I made the right choice for me. And God has affirmed that over and over. I did become a “new creature,” and old longings vanished.

I know others will find today’s cultural acceptance of homosexuality just the ticket for them. God bless ‘em. They are free to live as they choose. It may not all be a bed of roses down the road for them, or they may remain gay and happy.

You also ought to know that I am very upfront with the women in my group about this. They are there by choice. They know they are free to walk out the door and never come back. They can choose the life they want to live. I will still love them and pray for them. I meet them in the middle, just as Christ meets us all. I just require honesty of them.

The gay-affirmed folks I know and love also know what I believe. I can’t condemn them and I will never seek to force any kind of change on them. It is between them and God.

Debbie:

It came from the law God had written on my heart, to put it in biblical terms you may or may not relate to. I broke that law, suffered the associated pain of my rebellion, and was reconciled again to both God and my husband.

Speaking from one Christian to another, the only law we live under is the law of love: “This is my commandment that you love one another that your joy may be full.” The Christian is no longer under the law of Moses.

By your words, you are saying a gay person is breaking God’s law. Which law are you referring to? You are saying that a gay person rebels against God. How? You also seem to imply that reconciliation is applied to being married to someone of the opposite sex. When Jesus and John the Baptist said, “Do penance (repent) for the Kingdom of God is at hand” were they telling the people to get married to someone of the opposite sex? Your understanding of Christ’s message bewilders me.

Debbie Thurman said:

I came into this discussion because I actually believed something fruitful might come of it. Dave, you had me believing that. Was I dead wrong?

Which is why your comments were so disappointing.

And Dave, the comment I made about my role in the Uganda anti-homosexuality bill protest, or however we wish to refer to it, was speaking to the events that led up to Warren Throckmorton creating his Facebook group and folks beginning to find concrete ways to speak out.

I’m aware of some of your activity on his blog, but to claim that you were “at the tip of the spear” and that through your efforts “a movement was born” really seems a stretch. The current effort started early in March and several of us have had our ear to the ground for new developments since — including Warren. His recollection, and my own observations, indicate that he did what he did for reasons other than your prompting or input. That is not, however, meant to denigrate anything you have done on this issue.

In the heat of battle (debate), we all say things that would have been better left unsaid. Please forgive me if I caused unmerited pain with any of my words. Realize that there is a kind of sorrow we are all meant to know, one of convicting insight in our spirits.

My words will not always be dripping with honey as I defend my faith and His truth. The word of truth is a two-edged sword, or as the author of Hebrews puts it, a scalpel surgically dividing good from bad. That’s the tough part. Compassion bids me to forgive and seek reconciliation after the conflict.

Your interpretation of scripture is very harsh, but this is not the time or place to deal with that. Suffice to say that if people react negatively to someone because they are acting like a son-of-a-gun, it would be unwise to attribute that response to rebellion against God. More often it is rebellion against the son-of-a-gun.

I’m glad you clarified your opposition to the Anti-Homosexuality Bill in Uganda. Even at this late date, it would be good to hear such a clear statement from Exodus, FOTF, et al. Has Focus made any comment at all yet?

Debbie, I understand completely why someone wouldn’t WANT to be gay. Considering what is at stake, who would?

I understand the struggle with being gay, BUT there are other things society requires of the different that are impossible and take great pains to either conform to, or relinquish to.
Those of us who dissent with you recognize what you’ve done. Why don’t you?

The major difference between abandoning being gay and other matters of conformity is the religious root of non acceptance, and the general belief that homosexuality CAN and SHOULD be repressed for the gain of spiritual and social acceptance.

The other matters of conformity don’t require that discipline, but those who attempt or even accomplish it are DEEPLY diminished in other way they don’t recognize.

And society continues to demand and expect that discipline from the rest, who can’t or don’t choose it.

And in all of this: where really is the choice?

Do you really think you wouldn’t have been so dissatisfied with being gay, were there no such demands on you and everyone else like you?

Struggle is a fact of life. Being TAUGHT to hate oneself and what you are, look like and so on is something that most people do have to deal with.

But it’s coming out on the other side of successful acceptance and learning the sort of coping skills that make one stronger, not capitulation into the mental and physical burdens of societal and political pressure and calling it something else, like ‘holiness’ or courage.

I’ve known blacks, particularly from living through Jim Crow and horrendous personal setbacks because of the rest of their brethren being caught in such a socio/political burden.
Some blacks have been damaged more from it than others, and sought out spiritual relief, constant validation and reassurance.
But the difference here is spiritual relief for gay people bears a requirement that’s not necessary nor something that improves being homosexual OR heterosexual.

If a black person, struggling with racial identity, gave into the repressive nature of Jim Crow, validating those who created the system, they would be losing the most important part of themselves in the process.

There is no amount of religious discipline, absorption or having an opposite sex relationship that will give you back what really matters.
Where you began and how you were made is who you really are. You would have known that WITHOUT religion, without any kind of teaching you that’s who you are, or were.

You gave it up. You relinquished. You call it healed, coming out on the other side of the struggle.
But if you really, truly were so comforted and so much happier now and consider it earned and well done…

You wouldn’t care what we thought, you wouldn’t come around here and you’d get on with your life without the need to constantly ARGUE the point of who you think you are now.

Perhaps it’s not so much you’re not accepted by gay people, but that THEY recognize that you’re not needed, and you’re more of a nuisance.
Those gay people that have come to their own terms, and found a healthy return on investing in their spiritual health without giving up on their identity are the healthier and better and BRAVER for it.

Struggle builds character. Capitulating to what causes the struggle in the first place, doesn’t.

You’re not really who YOU think you are, and it’s gay people who recognize that more than a straight person would.
You traded one thing for another, but you didn’t trade UP.

When you choose another family to adopt you, why come around to the family you’ve decisively shown YOU don’t want anymore?

When you choose another family to adopt you, why come around to the family you’ve decisively shown YOU don’t want anymore?

What a sublime question, Regan. Thanks for asking it.

First, let me say this has been an interesting week. I consider it a privilege to be having this conversation with you all. I am well aware that in coming here, I am in “your house,” and I don’t take that lightly.

To some of you, I have entered as an uninvited invader. Others have accorded me the courtesy we might give a distant relative who happens to drop by for a visit. Others really don’t care one way or the other. Thank you. All of you, because I have grown and learned from it, as it should be. Even misunderstandings are only temporary and ought not be taken as permanent and divisive. Where we can agree to disagree, we should. (Maybe we can call that bridge-building, Dave.)

Just once more, I seek your indulgence as I address Regan’s legitimate question. Perhaps we can wrap up the “visit” today, but if it is worth continuing, fine. I won’t overstay my welcome, I hope.

Regan, I may choose to associate with one family over the other, as you do, but that doesn’t mean I believe this one is any less important. Rarely does an adopted child get to consciously decide to leave one family and live with another. Rather, it is almost always the original family (we’ll call them extended cross-generational family as the mother is frequently young and unwed) that relinquishes the child. How often does that child grow up, feeling some invisible attachment to the lost family, so much so that he or she seeks them out in hopes for some kind of reconciliation? Interesting, isn’t it?

In God’s scheme of things, we all can be adopted family, and siblings of or fellow heirs with Christ himself to the Father’s kingdom, if we allow that adoption to take place. He already chooses us (John 3:16), but we also have a choice. And while God then urges His children to “come apart” from the world we formerly lived in, He most assuredly does not mean for us to forget its occupants, who are fellow potential siblings and people with all manner of hurts and needs and amazing gifts. Even many within our family are needy, and we typically have sibling rivalries and differences of opinion that temporarily divide us. But love is the glue that is meant to hold it all together. It “covers a multitude of sins.”

I am not permitted by God to look down on my fellow man just because we may live in different families. When I do that, I am in blatant disobedience, and will be disciplined for it. It happens, I am sorry to say. The toughest thing about the Christian life it that it is so daily, to quote a friend of mine. We say it is a “dying to self” and an unselfish embracing of something much bigger than us. That dying happens by degrees. Thankfully, we are not “kicked out of the house” while we are growing up.

So, I guess to finish my answer to you, Regan, I want to know my potential family, as well as the one whose home I hang my hat in. I want to care about them, to hear their viewpoints, to let them know they are worthy children of God, whether or not they accept that or me. There does come a time when we all must realize the futility of going back when we are continually rejected. But hope is an awesome and powerful thing. The world would be pretty bleak and meaningless without it. And I happen to believe prayer also is the great equalizer. It’s the one thing we can continue doing long after we are rejected.

I know many here do not share my Christian worldview. That’s OK. Please know it is never my intention to force-feed it to anyone. How pointless would that be? Still, I hope some of you at least may care to know who and what I represent as we have to share this world together.

If you want to get a clearer picture of what I believe and specifically how it relates to homosexuality, feel free to read this. If not, fine. I seek to be an open book.

I hope that adequately answers your question, Regan. By the way, I could never begin to know what it’s like to walk in your shoes, as a black woman. Being an ex-gay woman, I guess I have a couple “strikes” against me as well, but nothing like what you’ve had to endure. We are complex, multifaceted beings. That’s what makes us such a rich tapestry. Bless you.

Hey, Dave. I have no hard feelings toward you or what we’ve shared here. I do regret the misunderstanding over my part in the Uganda thing. Perhaps I could have chosen my words a bit more carefully there.

I was not trying to steal anyone’s thunder, least of all Warren’s as I respect him a lot, and I know how much he blogged about the March conference, which was an event and a topic distinct from the bill itself, even though the two are related. And I know that others were covering that and making noise about the bill, too.

When I used the “tip of the spear” analogy, I meant I was sharing it with others, not that I was “the” point, certainly. However, I do recollect pretty clearly the days immediately leading up to Warren launching the Facebook group and the protest gathering a full head of steam through that. And I assure you I did play a role as a catalyst. I just gave a little push and others started doing their part and the train took off. No big deal to me who gets any credit. I don’t need any. Thanks for your help, too.

As for my “harsh” view of Scripture, yes, I think it best we don’t go there right now. Sin is not a pretty, sugary topic. Since we have a basic disagreement on homosexuality as sin, it would be fruitless.

And I have given up being concerned about the inconsistent measure of rebuke here, i.e., allowing Mike off scot-free with his off-base characterization of me while censuring Regan for something that did not offend me … or allowing another male to make a crass reference to his anatomy. It’s your show to run as you see fit, and I don’t believe you’re sexist or callous. I had forgotten Augustine’s (I think) prayer seeking forgiveness for the need to “vindicate myself.” That’s not a need. Gets us into trouble. God vindicates where necessary.

Peace to you.

Debbi, Con’t
Einstein said that the serious problems of the day can’t be solved by the consciousness that created them.

Gay people didn’t create the animus, myth and distrust around their lives. Straight people have done that and gay people have yet to live it down.
It’s the straight consciousness that wants to indoctrinate and remake gay people into THEIR image.

You’ve accomplished that. You’re proud of doing so, and there is no amount of covering it up with it being a level of spiritual awakening and discipline that will disguise the pig it really is.

You are RIGHT where straight people want you, not God.
You’re doing the work that straight people have wanted all along: to see that gay people disappear and not trouble them ever.

And as I’ve said all along, it doesn’t matter that you aren’t active out there fighting for gay rights. It would be too weird if you did. A contradiction in terms.

It doesn’t matter that you’re not actively fighting AGAINST gay equality, that would be weird too.

You’re NOT the other side of the same coin, as you’ve said before.
You represent a detriment to gay people who have to struggle with what you validate for ANTI GAY people.
Who just LOVE a docile, non confrontational ex gay person as an example that gay people CAN be brought to such a level.
And the ones who aren’t :well, you said it (the angry gay person who expresses their feelings are oh so stereotypical and such whiners!)

Go on and argue your point for the cause of living the way YOU want to.

But I say again: don’t come around here behaving as if it doesn’t come at a very high price. Especially for gay children.

When you got nailed with that fact you went off on a tear about what God and Jesus want for you.

These are INTANGIBLES.
This is about what YOU wanted for yourself, and rejecting feeling any storm of consciousness for it.

Straight people need YOU more than gay people do.

Gay folks know more about straight people than the other way around. And you’re not educating straight people in the way most necessary for the needs of gay people and honesty and expectations. This is where you’re not helping.
And if you think your weekly women’s group would be amused by that, then laugh it up and feel quite cozy as your back is wide open to the straight folks you’re entertaining.

He most assuredly does not mean for us to forget its occupants, who are fellow potential siblings and people with all manner of hurts and needs and amazing gifts.

Be careful that you don’t see “fellow potential siblings” (a phrase which bothers me for reasons I can’t quite articulate at the moment) as “projects.” And while I honestly don’t mean this in a bad way, I would suggest you try talking to people with a little less “christianese.” I share your faith and yet, after this thread, even I find myself wanting a Mormon or a Buddhist to chime in for some fresh air

Perhaps it is time to end Sunday school for now.

Regan said:

You are RIGHT where straight people want you, not God.

Not telling other people what God wants for them works both ways.

David, I actually hate that I got roped into that. As you can see, I don’t make theological or religious arguments I regret that I brought THAT in.

But I still stand by what I said that she’s right where the straight folks want her.

BTW, I went off on my Japanese friend when she told me about the surgery she was considering. I was in tears, we both were.
The pressure she was under was tremendous. She was a gorgeous girl.
I can’t tell you the outrage I felt that ANYONE could make her feel that way!
When my young friend told me he hated being Jewish, I had a similar reaction. He’d been raised in the Soviet Union and he and I went together connecting him to richness and courage of the culture he was from.

And being that I’m a dancer, I have known first hand, the damage that anorexia does, especially to young women.

I see this issue as all of the same and I am disturbed at any support for the disappearance of gay people. The diminishing of their numbers and false hope given to so many that’s painted as something BETTER and desirable.

Straight people have deflected their lack of moral superiority to that of God and Jesus having it, yet the results would still be the same.

Gay people are already a rare and compelling part of our human family, we might as well cut off a limb or blind ourselves.
Humanity won’t learn if there aren’t enough gay people to teach and reach them.
No thanks to MOST faith communities including ex gays, they’d rather that people go on ignorant and fearful as always.

It’s not necessarily BETTER to be straight, it’s simply DIFFERENT and more accepted.
And not necessarily accepted for good reasons.

Straight people don’t really have to consider what they are, or LOVE it. That would be like loving breathing.

Another less known, but equally compelling group are people who are asexual. This is another aspect of sexuality I’m studying with considerable interest.

Would straight people expect asexuals to be discriminated against because THEY don’t want to procreate? Would they force them into religious disciplines to have sex and bear children to prove themselves worthy members of the human family?
Would they harsh or ridicule someone who was asexual if they didn’t have relationships or romances to discuss and share?

I think not.
And I wouldn’t respect any religious community that told an asexual person they were bad, worthless to the support of humanity because they didn’t and couldn’t care less about having sex.

Perhaps this doesn’t seem to disturb the same dynamics that gay people do, but this is part of how little is honestly understood about sexual orientation and how our society and cultures at large care to.

We are witness to what people will endure to fit in, and what is demanded for them to.
Debbie DOES seem to have that docile quality that won’t challenge the status quo of straight people, but definitely compromises that of gay people.

If she was talking about being at the end of the spear, I think she was really on the blunt end.

“I know many here do not share my Christian worldview.”

I wonder how many Rightists realize that they exclude themselves from true Christianity by making such presumptuous statements.

Real Christians do not present themselves as spokespersons for God, nor do they falsely claim that their fallen and sinful worldview is Christian.

Perhaps it is time to end Sunday school for now.

Yeah, I’m all for that. The natives are restless and can never seem to fill their hungry tummies with us Christians. Too light, I guess.

Actually I was hoping that Mike (Airhart) could answer me something first – unless this is too off topic?

Mike, you said:

I wonder how many Rightists realize that they exclude themselves from true Christianity by making such presumptuous statements.

Real Christians do not present themselves as spokespersons for God, nor do they falsely claim that their fallen and sinful worldview is Christian.

I was wondering, what is “true Christianity” and how would you define a “healthy-unfallen” Christian worldview?

-Shawn

Wow. Maybe it’s time to implement a commenting policy?

I’m saddened by the way negative posts (like Debbie’s) are just going on and on, no matter how well – and thoughtfully – they’re answered (by commenters like Regan).

As for the comment re. Alan Medinger, I would say it’s more along the lines of “self-deception” than “failure.” The sad thing is, so many people have gone on that same ride. (And hey, I used to be a supporter of that particular ministry and actually like Alan as a person – just no longer agree with his views, and those of Exodus, as they’ve become so tied to theocratic right-wing politics and overt hatred – cf. Uganda.)

As for the negative comments… lashing out at people isn’t winning you any friends, let alone doing anything other than reinforcing what others here (including this blog’s owners) are saying.

Hi, Shawn,

I would be happy to discuss core values of the Gospels, and the extreme depravity and apostasy of the ex-Christian, un-American Right, but I’m not sure how much tolerance XGW has left for that, at least on this page. Perhaps XGW could either point to a page where that discussion would be appropriate, or we could take that discussion private.

Best,
Mike

I’ll post an open thread in a few so you can go on with that topic if you like.

Sure Mike. I wasn’t trying to start anything, just asking some questions. But, yeah, I would love a conversation. Here’s my email address … 611ministries at gmail dot com

-Shawn

(Better late than never, I guess.)

Debbie,

You’ve got to do more than simply make self-loving claims about yourself before the claims become true. I do think you are genuinely embarrased and conflicted (but not outraged, as such) by the firestorm that is engulfing a minority in Uganda in God’s name. But you’ve got a history of making outrageously angry statements about gay people that is as long as your arm. And they do damage people.

I’m going to give you a very pointed example. Long before you’d even bothered with Uganda the two of us had personal friendship from that bedraggled nation. The situation has become steadily worse over the past 5 years — driven largely by evangelical Christians with direct connections to evangelical Americans. Pentecostal features heavily, but it’s across the board (as anyone familiar with the dehumanising bile from Orombi will be well aware).

More than a year ago in an exchange with a colleague they passed on some hideous writings that had been passed onto them by an noxious anti-gay person in Uganda. I was already familiar with the opinion peices, and I want to highlight only a snippet of the words that helped fuel their anti-gay attitudes.

Proudly flaunting a deviant, destructive lifestyle and trying hard to dissociate themselves from the AIDS holocaust, activist gays and lesbians are waging their own brand of terrorism against the Church of Jesus Christ, the capitulation of which would be their crowning achievement.

Have we forgotten where AIDS originates? … AIDS cases soar to the stratosphere in the gay ghettoes, those urban areas where most homosexuals congregate and where gay bathhouses still operate with impunity. These are also the enclaves where intravenous drug use abounds.

One of the fast growing [HIV positive] demographics is now males, ages 13 to 24 … points to the likelihood of older HIV-infected men having more sex with teenaged boys.

Words from someone who claimed to have changed their sexual orientation. Words from someone who works in Christian ministry and who claims to be able to guide gay people back to the correct path. Someone long connected to and defender of a large wealthy American church long ruled over by a man infamous for making the same sort of inflammatory statements about gay people.

Do the words sound familiar?

Why do you think an anti-gay person in Uganda was inspired by this American writer?

What do you imagine can happen when words like those about a despised minority are believed in a corrupted and brutalised society?

I have to agree with you on one point at least:

They may end up being shamed and reaping what they sow.

Debbie — the harvest is in, and what bitter bread it makes.

@ grantdale – I hear you. I used to be a member of a church that strongly supports “Third Wave”/Transformations-type theology – and some pastors in Uganda who adhere to that way of thinking.

The way lots of these groups have infiltrated other countries (not just uganda) is downright scary. And what they bring to those countries is fear, an increase in superstition (albeit presented in a “Christian” veneer) and an absolutist solution for all members of society.

None of that is right, nor (as far as I can tell) is there any biblical warrant for it.

Mike: I’ve often noted this whenever I hear a christian explain to me about our “sinful, fallen and broken” world.

If the world is so sinful, fallen, and broken, how do you know that anything you believe, anything you have to say, is true in any sense of the word, especially when you make comments aobut your “Christian worldview”, as if there is only one.

Debbie siad “They have said that “Satan” is using us to “further his agenda”

Satan can and does use any of us to further his agenda, if we are not careful. I believe he is using the Church most of all these days. Yeah, that one makes we weep.

I need only look at what many so-called Christians are doing and have always done to gay people, or anyone else they get their hands on, to know thus us true.

As Mark Twain put it (besides ‘nothing needs minding so much as other people’s business’)

“Man is kind enough when he’s not excited by religion, but once the holy holies have got a grip on him he’s capable of almost anything. When a disciple from the wildcat religious asylum comes marching forth, get under the bed. It doesn’t matter whether he’s a Christian, Hindu, Jew, or Muslim. If he’s made up his mind that you need reforming, he will do it with anything handy — an ax, eight hundred years of witch burning or, if necessary, he’ll blow you up.

Grantdale, could you just clarify for us whether or not you believe there are any corrupt or predatory or deviant individuals who also happen to be gay? Any at all? Could you also explain why Matt Foreman, as he was leaving his post at the NGLTF last year, said that AIDS is a “gay disease”? I would never go that far, of course. Is he a traitor to the cause? Apparently, he had realized that numbers don’t lie. That’s my explanation. But I’d like to hear yours.

And if there are any such unsavory individuals in gaydom, is it a hate crime, in your view, to speak of them or censure their behavior? And if we cannot speak of them, then does that also mean we must stop speaking about straight sexual deviants? Do you have any statistics, by the way, to compare the relative numbers of straight deviants with gay ones? That would be useful information to have, wouldn’t it?

And while you’re at it, could you explain this statement you made above: “Long before you’d even bothered with Uganda the two of us had personal friendship from that bedraggled nation.” Huh?

I am flattered, by the way, that you could think anyone in Uganda with any influence at all may have ever read any of my writings from the whole two-three years or so I have even been addressing the topic. Me? That’s rich.

Sorry Debbie, but you do not get to reject your child even if it does have red-hair.

Gross self-denial may perhaps help your self-esteem, and be something you require to deal with life, but you are nothing if not predictable at such times. Those are your words, as you’ve now clearly stated. A brief few from what you’ve said. They are inflammatory, filtered through your cracked logic and intended to create moral panic. To what end? Where do imagine moral panic will take the mob?

They could just as well been the words from those pushing the anti-gay abuse in Uganda. For good reason. Pretend all you like — but your words were repeated by an appalling anti-gay activist in Uganda. What’s rich is your self-centred response to being told.

Note that in spite of the fact I have drawn that directly to your attention, you go and do the EXACT same thing in reply.

What would be your purpose for asking if there is any GLBT person who is corrupt or predatory or deviant or unsavoury?

The answer you want to that rhetorical question is all too obvious, because it’s what you do. You want to discover such individuals, and then use them to create fear and loathing about everyone else in a minority community. You may as well be channelling your mentor, the abusive Jerry Falwell. There is a word for that type of behaviour, and a word for what happens when the fear and loathing becomes common currency.

It’s also precisely what is going on in Uganda today.

Perhaps less obvious is our response: yes, there are. For a start — there are people like you in the GLBT community, if one was to believe what you’ve said about your own history. Your testimony is that of a corrupt, predatory, deviant and unsavoury individual. So the short answer is yes, people like you exist. As do others.

Your claimed testimony is also a polar opposite to ourselves; now or in the past. Perhaps you need to see yourself as basically good but corrupted by others, but we need not pander to that insecurity. Only in a World of ignorance could someone listen to you and draw parallels about us, and act accordingly. Such a World exists, in places.

We then come to the next clear example from your few words.

Matt Foreman was speaking to an audience of gay people. Not to an audience of heterosexual church-goers who wanted their prejudices confirmed — a role you have adopted — but an audience of gay people and allies looking to the future.

Those words you are misrepresenting could just as well have been “AIDS is a disease that effects us.” They were contained within the statement he was actually making: a denunciation of the thoroughly inadequate and untargeted response to the impact of HIV/AIDS on black Americans. Foreman called it as racism. And we cannot disagree.

Over the years I’ve heard priests, pastors and clerics make the same statement to their flock: “AIDS is a disease that effects us.” I’ve walked past a masjid in Java and seen a poster “Muslims can get AIDS too”, as if that were a necessary thing to plainly state. Well over two decades ago the first broad efforts to combat HIV in Australia began with the grim warning that AIDS will show no fear nor favour.

Should I have walked away from those occasions and concluded “Wow, the Methodists are causing AIDS and they even admit it. We should do something about them.”? No.

Matt Foreman said nothing like your brutal accusation “Have we forgotten where AIDS originates?”. Your disturbingly inaccurate words are intended to inflame a straight audience rather than protect a gay one. Your words weren’t a call to examine and eradicate a prejudice, but finger-pointing to further a different prejudice.

Somewhat ironically (not your forte, I realise) but if it hasn’t yet become apparent to you that we — when we can — are more than willing to address any of the unsavoury individuals in this World, and call them on their behaviour, and not regard it as a hate crime… then you probably also think none of the above has anything to do with you.

Stop making excuses for your behaviour Debbie, or deflecting it onto others. This is serious.

We can only suggest that you temper your aggression until you realise how serious.

ps: I’m not going to bother explaining what friendship means, or in fact say anything more on the particular matter. I will not knowingly endanger people, nor break promises. Those are basic responsibilities in life that no adult should ever need reminding of.

After reading the full text in question, indeed authored by Debbie Thurman (and not long ago it seems), I would have to agree with what grantdale has said so well. I was nauseated with what I found there, defense of James Hartline and all. I can’t for the life of me imagine anyone wanting to walk a bridge to where you are now, Debbie. If out of the abundance of the heart the mouth truly speaks, your heart is a dark and hateful place.

Debbie, Ugandans could be understood for seeing your stand against this bill as hypocritical and confusing — and sadly you are not the only one causing such puzzlement. Soundly renouncing your previous stand and asking for forgiveness is again the only way for you to have any moral authority to now contest their heinous attempts to destroy nearly a million lives.

I have no idea what hate crimes law has to do with this (unless you plan on physically assaulting someone). You are free to say what you want, but we are also free to take it seriously as an indication of what you truly think, of the kind of person you are. Tragically, at least some in Uganda appear to have also taken you seriously, and the consequences of that should weight heavily on the heart of anyone with a conscience.

Emily K:

And since most of the people who post here are Christian (I am not, I’m Jewish), or are at least religious to some degree, I find it hard to believe that all of us are trying to “wage a war” against “the church.” (well, ok, as a Jew I can still be accused of that I guess. But I’ve really learned not to care.)

It is sad that there are Christians who constantly feel their church is under attack, but then I think it gives them a sense of purpose. Christ spoke of peace and for us to love our neighbor and to treat others the same exact way we want to be treated, but there are many Christians who ask the question, “What’s the fun in that?” As many Christians there are trying to tear down the dividing walls, there are twice as many building new ones.

For your people, Emily, (and some of mine as I have Jews in my ancestory), the game was “Get the Jesus Killers” in Europe for the majority of its history since Christianity came on board. Native Americans and Blacks enjoyed the hatred spread on the New Continent. Now it is the LGBT’s turn to be the hated group, and once our turn has passed another group will be the target.

If we Christians, all Christians, especially those in authority, really listened to the message of our founder, whom we believe to be both God and Man, we would be more concerned with what Christ was concerned with, and not singling out a group to persecute them. But again, most Christians see the world as one of good versus evil, and they will stop at nothing to see that the enemy, aka anyone not Christian (or Christian according to their criteria), eliminated either by conversion or deprevation or elimination.

As I said before, if Christ came back today those on-fire Christians would nail him to a cross faster than the Romans could.

Grantdale,

Thank you for pointing out Debbie Thurman’s previous hateful diatribe against gay people. When I first started reading it, I thought it was written by Lively. It was amongst the most vile things that I have read from one of these ex-gays.

In an earlier exchange in this comments section with Mike Airhart, Debbie seemed all over the place, and didn’t make much sense. I now feel that I have a very good understanding of Debbie. She is no better than the other hatemongers, and her very words are being used to encourage adoption of the death penalty for gay people in Uganda. Perhaps her description of herself as the “tip of the spear” was applicable the Ugandan situation. Reminds me of the spear that was shoved into Jesus on the cross.

But when you paint an entire community with a broad stroke such as this

Emily, I do not. I paint a part of it with the brush it merits. You, likewise, paint a part of conservative Christianity with the brush it merits. What’s fair for the goose is fair for the gander. We’ve got darkness, hypocrisy and hate in both camps. Hear that or be deaf to it. It’s not my responsibility to make anyone hear.

Dave, you are a hypocrite who hands out phony olive branches. Your brand of Christianity is as the whited sepulcher. I am very sad for you, and others who look to you.

Grantdale, you are very confusing and make no sense at all. Somebody in Uganda has quoted my words? Who, pray tell? Can you understand how a person can be opposed to certain behaviors yet uphold human rights? You would invalidate everything I have said or done on behalf of Ugandan gays (and many other compassionate words I have written and spoken) because I believe homosexual behavior is sin? Who made you God? And the CDC has kept statistics for years on the rates of MSM-transmitted HIV, the facts that cannot be ignored. Everyone who has ever pointed out the uncomfortable truths is not to blame for what Uganda seeks to do. Sorry.

Alan, the Church has always been under attack. But Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against it. It’s not my Church. It’s Christ’s.

I will not cease to be an apologist for the faith. Anyone who does not understand his own proclivity for sin is deceived. None of us has a fully pure heart. I know what is in me. Do any of you?

One day, you each will have occasion to remember this discussion. It is now over, for my part.

Alan, the Church has always been under attack. But Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against it. It’s not my Church. It’s Christ’s.

But Debbie, God will take care of that. Christ told us what to do, and he never mentioned denying a group of people their right to life, or to deny a group of people their freedom. If God doesn’t do it, who do your type of Christianity think you are to go beyond God?

Debbie Thurman said:

We’ve got darkness, hypocrisy and hate in both camps. Hear that or be deaf to it. It’s not my responsibility to make anyone hear.

As much as you continually try to portray this false dichotomy, there are more than two “camps” here. There are many different points of view, and thankfully yours is not the view of the entire Church. But it’s nice to know that, in yours, doing wrong is ok as long as you think others are doing so.

I’ve been commenting, then posting for XGW since about 2004. In that time, I can’t remember a single instance when grantdale gave false information or showed deception. They may push the bounds of civility from time to time, but they do not lie. Quite the opposite, they frustrate many with their uncanny accuracy. If they say that your writings were used in Uganda, believe it. Speaking of things for which one will be held accountable one day…

My original appreciation for your speaking out against the bill in Uganda was genuine. There are very few people with whom I will not carry on a civil conversation, and my faith does not allow me to hate someone (though I must work hard on that at times). However, your response to my appreciation does seem hypocritical, as do (now) your protests against the bill in Uganda.

When one speaks out of both sides of ones mouth, the message is canceled out. I think this may be what Regan was getting at by saying you were of no help. When confronted honestly about this, you have rationalized and countered with “goose and gander” tripe.

I again suggest you step back and decide what kind of person you want to be.

Thanks for articulating what I struggle to, David.

I don’t appreciate Debbie behaving as if the ‘two sides’ she keeps talking about have an even chance of being considered fairly or rightly.

Gay people are at the worst disadvantage by lesser numbers alone.
And the chronic libel that they threaten people even by being discussed.

Debbie is unfair in her own assessment of how ANYONE can possibly respond to that without being angry, or expressing hurt.

I have been at TownHall
http://www.townhall.com up until a month ago, but for over a year.

The latest article by Matt Barber is called “The Gay Jihad” he claims there are threats from ‘homosexual activists’ on his colleagues compare to the attack on Ft. Hood.

I have participated in the comment threads for over a year.

And the few gay people and allies like me are spoken to like children. Debbie has also expressed such sentiment as if gay people have responded like children to what are libel and slander and incredible ironies and threats to their access to full self reliance.

When adults are not treated like adults, regardless of what they do, even by people who never met them, and don’t want to, it’s an impossible indictment and impossible to fight or argue against.

This is typical of abusive relationships. And I wouldn’t be exaggerating if I called the gay/straight conflict exactly that. With gay people in the unfortunately weaker position, and the dominant culture knowing that.

Debbie and just about every ex gay I ever spoke to doesn’t seem to know how weak they are, and docile.
And unusually needful of WAY too much validation that they are otherwise.

They might unburden themselves to God and Jesus, but burden gay people in other ways they obviously won’t admit to.

And I really HATE that.

Debbie,

You still cannot see yourself in all this.

We don’t mind that David has now given the link to some of your writings, but we’d left them out for one particular reason. This was less about informing others, and more about holding a mirror up to yourself. Uncomfortable as that may be.

Whatever you may do, or at least try to do, at this point in time; we had hoped to see some contrition from you. We chose those quotes because they covered three topics:

1) gays are a threat because they ungodly and are at war with us,
2) gays are a threat because they cause of AIDS, and
3) gays are a threat because they are after the children.

I would like you to now consider what are the three driving themes behind the abuse in Uganda. What are the three core reasons behind that legislation? Now read above, again.

Of course you didn’t invent that sort of behaviour towards gay people. You’ve inherited and/or adopted the attitudes. But you did chose to go beyond holding an opinion, and have a history of launching into tirades against all gay men and women.

You know Debbie, if I seriously thought any group of people were attacking me personally and my society more broadly, were the cause of a hideous disease they appear to be deliberately spreading, and were a direct threat to children: I do have to pause and wonder how I would react. What would I demand be done to them, I wonder. What sympathy would I have for human rights if I thought a group had ceased to have any right to them?

Honestly, I don’t know. I’ve never been in such a place, about any group.

I do know I have a visceral response when I see injustice, and a tendency to treat people as individuals… but I also know I’m only human. What sort of abuse could I condone if I were to be surrounded by a different society, and imagined that we were facing a serious threat? I honestly don’t know, and not for want of asking myself.

Does that give you any indication that we do in fact think of such matters? I suspect what you term as a ‘pure heart’ is more a matter of religious conformity than the way we see it, but we need no lectures from you on self reflection.

So I’ll ask you: do you understand that a person cannot be holding up human rights if what they are actively opposing is, in fact, a human right? It’s a contradiction in terms, and all too easily rationalised away. (You do recognise a person’s intimate family life as a core human right, do you? Do you always act as if it is?).

In watching the efforts made by Warren Throckmorton over the past months, it has been unavoidable but notice a recurrent attitude from some on his blog (as but one example of where it’s occurring). The question keeps getting asked about what compromise could be made; as if this were simply a question about the harshness and form of punishment, and about who should organise the sanctions against homosexuality.

It’s not.

Debbie I cannot invalidate what you’ve said and done in recent weeks. But I suspect that others will read the words that we quoted, now knowing they are in fact yours, and now knowing what you have said and done in the past, and find your hypocrisy, rationalisation and defensiveness to be invalidation enough. (That, btw, is why we didn’t directly link to those pieces of yours). The question we always had for you is ultimately whether you know why the situation in Uganda exists in the first place.

There is no need to incite fear, be the cause of hate, heap abuse on, gaol or execute people like me. Gay people — including me — are not waging war on society, deliberately spreading disease nor destroying the lives of children. I’m not a threat.

Yet if I go to Uganda, or out my door, I can be treated as if I am. Not just misunderstanding or antipathy or inequity, but to the point of malice and violence.

Am I to blame for that, even partly or indirectly?

Are you?

ps: your incredulity about whether someone has read what you deliberately published online is an outstanding piece of performance, even for little ol’ you. Good grief.

I didn’t want to get into this, but… @ Debbie: some of us are trying very, very hard not to say something unkind to a fellow Christian. If you see yourself as being “persecuted,” perhaps you’re inciting it?

Et tu, Brutus.

I really doubt Debbie’s homosexual “past” when she uses the word “lifestyle” because someone who is same sex attracted will never use that word, as lifestyles are never exclusive to homosexuals. And, by associating homosexuality to AIDS, then claiming MSMs transmit HIV according to CDC (when some MSMs are heterosexuals, and lesbians are at the lowest risk group), I believe we can safely say that Debbie was never a honest lesbian.

Also, now thanks to GrantDale, it is confirmed that she is just one of those people making claims of homo-cure just to get some mileage in their sorry bigoted lives. God Bless Debbie.

I believe we can safely say that Debbie was never a honest lesbian.

I’m not sure what you mean by “honest” lesbian (open?), but generally I tend to take people at their word on something like that unless there is significant reason to doubt it (and there are a few). Referring to “the lifestyle” and similar ex-gay speak can’t really be the litmus test, something to which many ex-ex-gays could attest.

Apologies. The whole statement by me was supposed to mean that Debbie is either lying about her supposed past as a lesbian, or she had never been a lesbian at all. The basis is contained in her views of homosexuality, and her extreme views on that “threat”. Come to think of it, just as we noticed that “change” by Exodus / ex-gay groups have no definite meaning, so do “lifestyle”. Even the word “homosexual” has no consistent definition by the ex-gays. It is just twisted around by certain groups to justify that homosexuality is a sin.

Hmmm…Just a thought. I mentioned TownHall recently, and because I’m somewhat stubborn, I decided to stick around there after quite a long time despite, serious abuse. Maybe that was the pebble in the shoe?

I mean I was outright called vicious names, my profession and how I went about it was derided, the ridicule was constant no matter what I said, even if I agree on some points, and eventually I my real name was used and I was accused of committing acts that were against my professional oath (a crime) and accused of saying things I didn’t to rationalize the whole business.

All that for being honest and letting the group know that I had my facts straight, in part because of participating in law enforcement.

I realized that I had a thicker skin than those who joined the mob. I know what is required of me, and although I might be brutally frank, being characterized a hysterical, angry and so on…is almost laughable in comparison to the opposition.
There is, after all, far more urgency for gays and lesbians and more justification for losing patience with the debate style we’re confronted with.

When I compare comment threads here and PHB and even Joe. My. God. and BTB, there is a great deal more civility and bravery than I have witnessed there at Townhall. I toughed it all out for over a year. They don’t visit here or the other threads, even though I directed them that way.

I’m back at work now after a year off for medical reasons. I simply don’t have the time to comment so much at TH.
But nothing has changed.
I’ve read articles in WaPo, NYTimes and several women’s magazines that I subscribe to regarding the violence, illiteracy and poverty of females in America and globally.

Child brides are still a problem in Third World countries as is the sex trafficking especially of young girls. In America this traffick is especially troubling because you would think there would be more resources or parents held accountable for this outrage. Not so.

Yet, the preoccupation, in particular with gay men, is at the exclusion of what I know happens to sexual victims, male or female. Talk about homosexuality, they’ll invoke NAMBLA, but can’t name ONE of the many thousands of equivalent hetero male groups who have put themselves online actually attacking little girls. Some of whom are their own daughters.

The latest famous person (other than Mackenzie Phillips) to talk about it is Tyler Perry.
He was abused by both a man and a woman.
Women abusers still fall under the radar, but when I try to direct the conversation about the real criminal statistics, incarceration and my ability to know this information from firsthand experience and databases, I was accused of doing something criminal myself, instead of any of those people ASKING me where they could get more information, help the problem or what my concerns were.

I have never seen anyone so PATHOLOGICALLY invested in damaging gays, that there can be no allied front to address and change the problem of sexual abuse.
Or anything else that hurts both gay AND straight people.

This IS very much like the pathological paranoia of black sexuality SO GREAT, that a casual encounter between a black man and the assumed target of his lust, would result in a street death sentence of that black male.
Even black little boys got put in jail.

There isn’t a thing different about the pathologies of preoccupation with gay male sexuality, the target is different, that’s all. And their response is Jim Crow like laws, same as against blacks.

I consider ALL of these people, ex gays, anti gay straight people and some Christians, the weakest link to combating society’s greater problems. They keep the paranoia fires burning and the expectations unrealistic about gay lives.
Yet, to hear THEM tell it, they are strong, they are such soldiers, they are SO good at what their Lord tells them to do.

There is nothing worse than a person who thinks of themselves as very good and good at what they do, while in reality, they completely fu*k up everything.

Even honesty is impossible and the first casualty.

The most vital thing: cooperation, and allied front, is completely impossible and for ridiculous reasons.
Debbie IS very weak, and although not everyone who seeks counsel in faith would be, it’s no surprise that someone would need that communion to at least FEEL stronger, more in control and less vulnerable.

But she is absolutely worthless up against the viciousness and commitment to lies and deceit and stereotyping that gay people are up against.
She doesn’t care to be an advocate, so what?
She wouldn’t be an effective one, for obvious reasons.

It saddened me that I couldn’t engage the people at TownHall, for example, in joining those brave gay men and women in the uniforms of peace officers everywhere in combating the terrible crimes out there.
Know what they said?
That it didn’t matter, those officers were doing it for sinister reasons, and I was abetting evil out there for supporting them!

What can you do with people this insane? They are exhausting. Our friend Swampfox can attest.
I tried. I just had no idea people would be THAT irrational.
I really didn’t.

I had a sweet little aunt that had been damaged by religious people and she wasn’t interested in participating in the civil rights movement. She didn’t have the strength, and she admitted that.
But she didn’t tear down and criticize those advocates out there, nor put down any loss of patience or stoic responses to whatever pain.
And I consider that more than fair. She’d paid her dues.

I know I’m going on about this, but I wanted to get it said.
Bishop Jackson is now angry that the gay folks are making the Catholic Charities withhold help from the needy. His spin on this is breathtaking, but the last line of his article is most telling.
“If you want our help, you have to accept in on our terms.”

So, doing justice for someone is conditional? There’s a caveat on kindness and caring?

I’m glad I wasn’t taught that. I hadn’t always known what to expect if I advocate for gay folks. It’s been interesting and it has been very difficult and sometimes threatening and painful.
But I’m doing it, not for anything in return, on no condition.
But I HAVE gotten something in return…

And I’ve wondered if those spectacular epiphanies I’ve experienced are part of what you get when you truly love those who don’t have it in the world.
Perhaps my amazing friends, so studied in faith here can tell me?

Thanks for letting me vent.
Off to work.

Greetings, again. OK, this really is my closing, and I think you’ll want to hear it. If I just walk away now, I deserve to be “shot in the back” (please, not literally).

I have — unpleasant as it is — gone back and read a good number of these comments again, mine and others’. It was a painfully useful exercise. It’s sometimes hard to keep a straight train of thought or to really hear what’s being said in these kinds of discussions. Too easy to talk past each other. And far too easy to let old wounds surface and carry away sanity. I’ve been guilty of that.

First, as regards that older commentary of mine I’d honestly forgotten about, but needed to be reminded of: Grantdale, if you say someone from Uganda actually quoted that back to you (a very troubling thing to me), then I will have to take a hit for that. That means I do have some culpability. I have to be responsible for every word I have written, like it or not. That piece ought to have been removed before now — it will be ASAP. That is not the tone with which I write these days, and I have learned lots more since then. It was wrong of me to get defensive instead of pausing and looking at the bigger picture. I do wish you had been less cryptic in the way you approached that, though. And I’d also like to know who in Uganda may have used that as any kind of justification so I can be in contact with them and ameliorate that, for what it’s worth.

And Mike, would you do me the kindness of realizing that the way you characterized me in your statement regarding my views on Uganda (implying that I really supported the bill, etc.) was, indeed, incorrect? It seems as if you cobbled together a perspective without having all the facts.

Dave, forgive me for going off on you. It had felt to me as if I’d been in some way almost lured here and then ambushed. But that was a knee-jerk reaction on my part. Sorry.

I am well aware that my opposition to the bill in Uganda just looks like some kind of political posturing (for lack of a better term) to some folks here. I assure you I am genuinely appalled at Uganda’s push for this bill, and I did not feel when I learned of it that I could keep silent. It seems my help is neither appreciated nor wanted by some. But I will lend it nevertheless as it’s the right thing to do.

If I refuse to drag myself out into the light and allow God to examine me, woe is me. He uses tools we don’t always recognize at first for that very thing. Hurts good. I can’t change my core beliefs, but I can certainly be willing in the future to refuse to take offense so readily and speak with more kindness. The test for me is what I do with this. I intend to take it to heart and be the better for it.

By the way, Regan, psychologically speaking, I don’t think there remains much of anything deep within me needing special validation, but I’ll stay open to the possibility. Not that I haven’t had to deal with my share of junk in life. I’ll let God work on that one. Happy to be a work in progress ’till I die.