Ware Farms

Speaking truth to prejudice

Friday, April 28, 2006


Jim asks "Why are Fundamentalists Anti-Gay?"

Fellow Christian blogger, Jim Johnson of Straight not Narrow has an article featured at the Gay Christian Outpost titled Why are Fundamentalist Anti-Gay.

It's hard to find the "key" quotes, since each paragraph has a few, but here is a sample to give you a feel for what Jim is saying:
Why do so many Christians put so much effort into condemning, discriminating against, and sometimes outright hating homosexuals? I'll share the primary causes that I have seen and offer suggestions for how it can be effectively handled.

I believe some of the loudest voices shouting against the GLBT community do so not due to any doctrinal belief, but to draw attention, wealth, and ultimately power for themselves and their organizations...

They appeal to the lowest common denominators, preaching about what gays and lesbians will “take away” from “traditional families.” Of course the infidelity, abuse, and dysfunction running rampant in those families which they are fighting so hard to maintain as “God’s blueprint,” is seldom if ever addressed...

How does this reflect God’s plan for our lives and spur the growth of the body of believers? Not very well, I'm afraid. Many, many things are said in God’s name that have little to do with God’s will for our society, be it in the United States or any other nation. Of course, Jesus showed us with his words, actions, and his painful death that Godliness is not about grabbing power and forcing people into your will. It is about being a willing servant and subjugating one’s own will to God’s. That’s not very “sexy” these days, even in Christ’s own church...

We don't need to fight, but we need to make sure our voice is heard because the other side is being broadcast at full throttle. They have a huge advantage in resources, but our side does have an edge.

They have God’s name, but we have God’s love and the Holy Spirit. If we show that to the world, they will indeed know that we are Christians by our love.

For those who are interested in a Christian perspective that is far different than the "gays are going to hell" variety, please take a few minutes to read to whole article.

Wednesday, April 26, 2006


Day of Silence Responses

I looked into Day of Silence blog posts and found the following to be insightful.

From Joe Killian:
I helped a handful of friends organize the first Gay-Straight Alliance at my high school in Connecticut some years ago - and it wasn't smooth sailing even in that time and place. We did have sympathetic faculty, though, and the administration knew what was good for them and didn't get in our way. In fact, when a gay friend had his car windows broken and his tires punctured shortly after the group was made public it sort of galvanized the administration to stand in opposition to the meatheads who thought that kind of thing was necessary.

I did get some shit from the northern equivalent of rednecks at first. I remember, in the cafeteria of our school one day, some kids stopped me -- my friend Brian LaRue might have been with me -- to try to intimidate me and to pointedly ask if I was gay.

"What -- are you looking for a date?" I asked them.

Which, being the mental giants they were, completely flumoxed them.

From Scared Ordinary:
Before the event, the advisors had informed the students that during the Holocaust of World War II, the Nazis tried to exterminate not only Jews, but also Poles, gypsies, communists, and homosexuals. To identify these "undesirables," the Nazis required each group to wear a symbol on their clothing, as we all know. As Jews were forced to wear a yellow Star of David, homosexuals were forced to wear an inverted pink triangle. Since then, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) community has reclaimed the inverted pink triangle as a symbol of pride and support for the gay rights movement. I did not know the latter, so thanks to the effort of the GSA, I became better informed.

During the morning break last week, students formed a large silent standing triangle on the main lawn. It was a deeply moving experience.

A bit of history about GLSEN co-founder Kevin Jennings and Massachusetts Governor William Weld from Lassiter Space
I knew Kevin Jennings back in the mid 90's when he was starting GLSEN. He once told me that he envisioned a future where every child learn to respect and accept all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. He was a teacher at the time and he devoted the next dozen or so years seeing that vision through. Gay kids nationwide owe Kevin Jennings a debt of gratitude, for making their cause his life's work.

During my Harvard days (circa 1993), I took a class called "Gay Issues in Education'' taught by prominent gayologist Dr. Arthur Lipkin. This was around the same time that former Mass. Gov. William Weld implemented a "safe schools" program that put anti-gay discrimination on par with racial discrimination within the public schools in Massachusetts. Basically it meant calling a kid a "faggot" would have the same gravitas as the N-word, for example. This is about the same time Kevin was getting GLSEN off the ground. Anyway the field work for the Harvard class was to research the efficacy of the safe school plan. Did Gov. Weld's program make schools safe for gay and lesbian youth? You betcha. In fact, Bill Weld remains my favorite republican politician ever. He was a moderate guy acting his conscience to protect gay kids.

All in all, I say that the Day of Silence was a meaningful experience for many.

Monday, April 24, 2006


How Loud the Day of Silence

My two previous posts have to do with my views on the limits of anti-gay speech by high school students. If Christians or others wish to propose a more positive alternative to the "gay lifestyle," then they are free to do so. If, instead, they say hateful or demeaning things about gays, I don't care if they're based on religion or come from the Bible, this type of speech cannot be allowed among vulnerable children whose presents is mandatory.

An appropriate expression of views in school is the "Day of Silence" scheduled for this coming Wednesday, April 26. Nearly a half million students in over 4000 colleges and high school will remain silent for the school day to remind us of how gays and lesbians have had to remain silent about their existence in the past and even today.

In the 1950's when I was in high school, I certainly didn't know that anyone was gay. The silence was unbreakable.

In an opinion piece in the Tacoma, WA News Tribune, Brent Hartinger relates his experience thirty years later:
Gay and lesbian Americans and their allies are finally making themselves heard. Even in some high schools.

It wasn't always this way. I first joined the gay youth movement back in 1989, when I helped establish Oasis, a Tacoma support group for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered youths. Only one of our 150 members was “out” at school, and he was receiving death threats.

Death threats, imagine. Speech can't get any more hateful than that. An anti-gay blogger a while ago (I can't remember where, SAT) mentioned that at least we don't put gays to death like they do in Iran and Iraq, as if gays should be so thankful for that concession that they refrain from asking for anything more.

I see that that the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which helps promote the Day of Silence, lists 11 high schools in Tennessee with Gay Straight Alliances (GSA's), which is far lower than the 80 per state average. Needless to say, Rhea County HS isn't among them, (although we do have a JROTC unit we're quite proud of).

This doesn't mean that no students here will be participating. I'll check the local paper and get back to you. Say, I've gotten to know the editor, with all my Letters to the Editor and all, so I'll e-mail him to see if he knows if students here will be participating and tell him I'd be eager to read about it if they are.

In fact, here's the e-mail:

I see that the National "Day of Silence" is being held this Wednesday in schools around the country. After that fiasco in March two years ago with the County Commissioners "Banning Gays from Rhea County" and the "Gay Day in Rhea County" response two months later, I'd be interested to know if any of our students in Rhea County High School will be joining in the "Day of Silence" activities. If they are, I'd be pleased to read about it in the paper.

William J. Ware, Sr.
Spring City

The reminder about the County Commissioners "Banning gays from Rhea County" is no joke. When I saw a few lines about it in the print addition of USA Today, I googled the net to see how wide spread our embarrassment should be. I found that Ed Brayton had given us his famous "Idiot of the Month" award on his blog. That's the day I made my first blog comment. I started this blog five months later.

I hope that the Day of Silence is a "roaring" success; that it proves how loud Silence can be.

Update: Our esteemed editor, JC, hasn't heard of any Day of Silence activities here in Rhea County. So I replied:

"Hmm. This is rather enigmatic. If someone were planning such an event, then they would seek publicity to see that their "message" was getting out to as many people as possible. If no one is willing to speak to this issue, then if shows how desperately we need such an event in the first place."

Sunday, April 23, 2006


Religion, Homosexuality and Free Speech in High School

The Alliance Defense Fund, which was involved in the "Homosexuality is Shameful" t-shirt suit mentioned in my previous post, is at it again.
Three Pennsylvania high school students backed by a conservative legal group have sued their school district, claiming they were prevented from quoting Biblical verses in school and expressing opposition to homosexuality, their lawyers said on Friday.

In their lawsuit, the students say they believe homosexuality is a sin and that they have the right to speak out about "the harmful effects of homosexuality."

The students ... are being represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, which argues their free-speech rights have been violated.

Comments at the bottom of a later Philadelphia Inquirer article, indicate that the students' primary concern was to be able to call their club the "Bible Club," mention they were a Christian group (although any student is welcome to join), and to quote Bible passages in the posters they are allowed to put up advertising their club as all extra curricular after school hours clubs are allowed to do.

This would appear to fit in with the Supreme Court finding that any school that allows other extra curricular clubs must allow religious orientated clubs, such as a Bible Study club as well. Guidelines ensure that clubs will be organized and run by students to make it clear that they are not representing an official school position. A teacher may be assigned, but for administrative purposes only, not as a participant.

The Downingtown School District has a policy which prohibits students from expressing opinions that seek "to establish the supremacy of a particular religious denomination, sect or point of view."

What??? It looks like they have taken a policy which correctly applies to school personnel who cannot promote religion in their offical capacity, and try to apply this to students, who are not government employees, as well. Sorry. While limiting discussion of religion (and politics?) may lead to a more tranquil environment, restricting student speech in this area is not something the school is allowed to do. In fact, I've never heard of such a thing before, have you?

A further Downingtown policy assures protection from "sexual, racial, religious, age, marital status, ethnic, political beliefs, disability status, ancestral, cultural, sexual orientation or gender harassment." It forbids "the dissemination of materials that attempt to diminish the worth of any individual or group."

OK. As part of the US Dept of Education "Safe and Drug Free Schools" program, schools have established anti-bullying programs to ensure that students will not be picked on for one reason or several. Students deserve a safe environment free from harassment which promotes learning. What constitutes bullying or harassment is subject to interpretation, of course, as the previous post shows.

From the Inquirer:
The lawsuit says that East High School Prayer Club members Stephanie Styer, Steven Styer and Kim Kowalski want to express their belief "that there is a superior religious point of view to other competing views that would, for example, affirm a homosexual lifestyle."

Well, it seems to me that how they say this has everything to do with whether it's acceptable or not. If they say, "We have good news for gays. Come to our 3:15 meeting on Wednesday and find out about it." This would be fine with me. If a gay goes there and doesn't like what he's hearing, he can always leave.

In contrast, if they put out the "usual" quotes from Leviticus and Romans, which are highly derogatory in nature, then that would amount to harassment and should not be permitted.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Friday, April 21, 2006


"Homosexuality is Shameful" T-shirt in School

The LA Times has an article about a high school sophomore who wore a T-shirt the day after the school's 2004 Day of Silence which read, "Be Ashamed, Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned" on the front, and "Homosexuality is Shameful" on the back. He was kept in a conference room "doing homework" for the day when he insisted on wearing the shirt which the school considered inappropriate.

The student is represented by the Alliance Defense Fund in a law suit claiming his right to free speech had been violated. The ADF represents Christians who feel that their rights to express their religious beliefs about homosexuality are being unfairly repressed in schools, colleges and the workplace.

The US Appellate Court has not made its final ruling, but did rule that the student can't wear the shirt for the time being, while the case is pending. The LA Times article gives the details.

This stimulated quite a discussion on free speech versus the right of gay kids not to be harassed at school over at the ex-gay watch web blog. I added this comment about public schools and free speech:

There's a major distinction between public schools and the public square.

The state requires children to leave the safety of their homes and the guardianship of their parents to attend school. In return, the teachers and school administrators assume a responsibility in loco parentus for the health and welfare of these children beyond just the formal requirement of providing them with an education.

If a child becomes ill, for example, the school informs the parent, of course, but must see that the child gets emergency treatment, if required, until the parent gets there.

From the LA Times article, "Reinhardt cited a study showing that among teenage victims of anti-gay discrimination, 75% experienced a decline in academic performance, 39% had truancy problems and 28% dropped out of school."

Children are more sensitive and vulnerable to criticism than we would expect adults to be. Protecting children from physical harm alone is not sufficient. As this report shows, psychological harm can be devastating. Gay teens have higher rates of suicide and other psychological difficulties. Fortunately, these rates have subsided since the Safe Schools and anti-bullying programs were initiated in the mid 1990's.

A parent can protect a child from the harm our local street preacher holding a "homosexuality is shameful" sign might do by avoiding the corner of Clinton and McClain or by immediately reassuring the child to the contrary. The school performs this "parent" function by not allowing a "homosexuality is shameful" T-shirt in a place where attendance is mandatory.

Judge Reinhardt made it clear that this restriction to free speech would not apply to colleges where the students have the status of adults who can fend for themselves. In high schools and elementary schools, however, the teachers and school administrators must take on the role of the parent and protect these vulnerable children from anti-gay and other harassment.

Friday, April 14, 2006


The Christian? Right?

Jim Johnson takes note of how derisively a former member of a Christian band was treated by his erstwhile friends after revealing he was gay. Jim ends:
Fortunately, not all Christians are like that, but sadly far too many do behave that way. You know, the Golden Rule isn't just a nice saying, it's biblical:

John 13:34 (NIV) Jesus says "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

Did you notice that there are NO qualifiers in that command. If we are truly seeking Christ's will for our lives, that's how we treat other people; so simple yet so difficult for many "godly" people.

I certainly agree.

In the 1970's, I visited a Jewish co-worker's home and noticed his wife had a bumper sticker on her car which read:

"The Moral Majority is neither"

I got a bit of a chuckle our of that. Thirty years later it appears we need an update:

"The Christian Right is neither"

Any suggestions as to where I could get one?

Update: Bumper Stickers abound. I got a chuckle from this one:

I'm for the separation of

Any readers have their favorites?

Wednesday, April 12, 2006


Easter Message

Let me provide an Easter message for you by directing you to a previous post which I called In the Garden of Eden

Happy Easter to all, Bill

Monday, April 10, 2006


Science, Religion and Charisma


You seem dismissive of knowledge for some reason. Surely you agree we've learned a lot in the 1600+ years since the Bible was put together. We use this knowledge to implement Christ's teachings.

When we find through 50+ years of research that sexual orientation is a fix trait for most everyone, then we approach our ministry to gays and lesbians differently than if we thought people just went out and engaged in that behavior willy-nilly.

When we deal with those who find the idea of being intimate with someone of the opposite sex vulgar and repulsive, then it isn't helpful to suggest they do what's "natural" and marry someone of the opposite sex like the rest of us do.

I find the Serenity Prayer helpful:

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

It would be in our best interest to understand that sexual orientation is one of those things which cannot be changed when we bring our message of Christ's love and redemption to our friends and neighbors who are lesbian and gay.

So that is why I ask you in all sincerity, "How does a Christian congregation who would treat others justly and fairly minister to the needs of those who are not among the 95% of our population who are born heterosexual?"

Jim Johnson has provided his church's answer. I'd like to hear yours.


Science has nothing to do with "beliefs." Science is the compilation of observations of the world and theories which help describe how the world works. The accuracy of observations is constantly improved; theories are modified or replaced as more becomes known. This self-correction is the beauty of science not a short coming. As time goes on our understanding of the world improves.

Religious beliefs provide the moral principles to live by. Yet religion, like all things, must operate in the reality of the world as it actually exists. Facts are stubborn things. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own set of facts.

Since studies started in earnest after WWII, our understanding of homosexuality has grown considerably, yet there is still a great deal yet to know. Never-the-less, it would work to our best interest if we consider what we know in determining the morally appropriate way of dealing with our gay and lesbian neighbors.

NB: The Bible was compiled in 325 AD by order of the Emperor Constantine, so that's where the "1600+ years since the Bible was put together" comes from.

Sunday, April 09, 2006


The Man in the Ditch


You seem rather enamored of Paul's letters while paying less attention to what Jesus taught us.

When the lawyer asked Jesus, "Who is our neighbor?" Christ responded with the story of the Samaritan, or as the Living Bible says, the despised Samaritan. He wanted to point out that the neighbor could be anyone who had compassion for the one who had fallen among thieves. Yet we could also look at this situation the other way and ask, "Who is the man in the ditch?"

Here in Rhea County we have our own bigot in residence, I call her "Ms. June." She doesn't think too highly of blacks, gays, Jews, Catholics or foreigners (I'm OK so far) or people who don't take the Bible literally (oops, she got me on that one.) When Gore chose his running mate in 2000, the sign in front of her little store read, "GORE CHOOSES ANTI-CHRIST." Apparently it slipped her mind that Jesus was Jewish.

So I'm driving down Toestring Valley Road one evening after dark and I see an old car by the side of the road and a man standing there, arms akimbo, looking down at a flat tire. Who was this man standing there by the ditch? Would it matter to me (or to you) if I saw he were black or knew he was gay, Catholic or Jewish. What if he were a Mexican here picking tomatoes?

He doesn't have a spare, it turns out, so we remove the tire and head to town where we get the flat fixed and I return him to his car afterward. He offers me a few dollars, but I told him no need since I was heading to town and back anyway. I ask if he has children waiting for him at home and he tells me three, so I remind him he's late, that they will have been worried, so I ask him to give them each an extra long hug when he gets there and that will be thanks enough for my efforts.

So who was this man standing there by the ditch? Why it was Jesus, of course. Remember the part about "the least of these, my brethren?" Some day when I meet Him face to face, He'll smile and say, "Oh, you were the fellow who stopped and helped me that night when I had the flat tire. Please stand over here on my right with the rest of the people who were good neighbors to others."

So we see, understanding what the Bible teaches is really quite simple:

STEP 1: Love God without reservation.
STEP 2: Love our neighbors as Jesus taught us.
STEP 3: Repeat over and over.

One doesn't have to remember every verse, jot or tittle. Living God's word is a matter of applying these principles as each new situation arises. So when Ms. June and others make nasty misstatements about the gays and lesbians here in Rhea County, I respond with letters to the editor speaking truth to these prejudices. That's what the Bible tells me being a good neighbor is all about.

Thursday, April 06, 2006


Pharisees Rebuked

Mercy me! I just can't resist responding to the fine folks at the Charisma forum.


I was taught to look at the Bible as a whole, focusing on the New Testament, and in particular the Gospels. What did Jesus do? What did Jesus say?

So many times we read that Jesus started out, "Ye have heard it said by men of old... this, yet I say unto you...that," where this and that are opposite things.

Look, I was told, at Jesus' words and His actions. Find in these instructions the principles to live by. If some verse here or there, even those written by Moses or Paul, is in conflict with Christ's teachings, then it is an error committed by these human beings who are just as fallible as we are.

Those today who quote this verse and that one to condemn others, whom they disagree with, are no difference the those Pharisees in His day who upheld every jot and tittle of the law, yet lacked human compassion for others.



Thanks for the heads up about the Pharisees. However, I think we are on parallel tracks. When I wrote about the jots and tittles, I was referring to the nit-picky details like the 4000 steps you mentioned. The Pharisees got on Jesus' case about healing the sick on the Sabbath. He asked them about the ox in the ditch and rebuked them for thinking it more important to keep the Sabbath than to cure someone's illness.

When I asked the question about the lesbian couple and their two young children moving in down the block, I noticed that those who responded would tell them how they were living in sin according to your understanding of the Bible passages you have been citing. I also noticed that no one suggested how you might give them a hand. Yet their family, like God's family, is a concern we all ought to share.

Jesus asked the young lawyer, "who was the neighbor to this man who had fallen among thieves?" So I ask you, "Who is the neighbor to this new family of four down the block?" Is it the one who chastises the couple for being gay? Or is it the one who welcomes them to the neighborhood and helps them move in? This is what Jesus was suggesting when He said that some are so intent on some point of law that they neglect being charitable to others.

Jesus advised us to gather up our treasures in heaven. So far as I can tell, being kind to our neighbors is the best way to do it.

Wednesday, April 05, 2006


Gays v Adulterers

Meanwhile, back at the Charisma Online forum that I posted about earlier, I posted this comment:

Star has a good point. There is a world of difference between being gay and being an adulterer. An adulterer is someone who, later in life, decides to break the vow he or she has taken to remain in a monogamous relationship with hsr spouse and have sex with someone else. In contrast, being gay is an essential part of one's existence from birth. It is not a decision one can make one way or the other.

We all celebrate love, sex and marriage for heterosexual couples since we understand that these things are a natural part of what it means to be human. We need to acknowledge this same basic understanding for lesbians and gays, even though their choice of that "one special person" is someone of the same gender.

Gays and lesbians are human beings, too, and the sooner we treat them with the understanding and respect they deserve, the better it will be for all of us.

BTW, Jim Johnson is not gay (and neither am I, but thanks for the compliment). He and his lovely wife, Brenda, are a heterosexual couple who attend a gay affirming church in Virginia. As a Christian, I'm pleased to see this upsurge in the number of churches, like Jim's, who treat gays like neighbors, as Jesus taught us. I hope this trend will continue.

Update: I mentioned the Apostle Paul in this previous posting.

Some may find this comment in my previous post interesting.

Monday, April 03, 2006


Can Gays be Christians?

On a visit to Jim Johnson's Straight not Narrow blog, I noticed that he was having a discussion at the Strang Group on the topic of To Be Gay...and Christian?

Jim, who attends a gay affirming Christian church, didn't take too kindly to the idea expressed that a person can't be both.

I chimed in with a few comments of my own:

Jim Johnson,

Thanks for your excellent defense of the true meaning of Christ's teachings. When Christ commanded us to "love our neighbors as we love ourselves" He didn't exclude our friends and neighbors who are gay.


Since you live in England, you might be interested in Courage, the Church of England's ex-gay program. Fortunately many US churches are coming around to this same view, like the one Jim Johnson attends. Since sexual orientation cannot be changed, we need to provide the Christian fellowship experience for our lesbian and gay church goers.


It's not so much about interpreting the scripture as it is about facing the reality of gay existence. All those years of prayer and repentance and the believers they worked with were just as gay as when they started. This confirms the universal understanding that being gay is an innate characteristic, not a choice, and therefore cannot be changed.

So the question then becomes, how do we treat our fellow gay and lesbian Christians. I would treat them as I would all of God's children, like neighbors, the way Jesus taught us.

Brother B,

I'm not sure why you might group homosexuals, adulterers, fornicators, and alcoholics together. Being gay is an innate condition, while the latter three are conditions one may or may not acquire later in life. The Courage program I referred to above, with its prayers and repentance, failed to change what is an essential part of a person's basic make up.

So I'm still curious as to how Christians should treat our gay and lesbian neighbors. What is our Plan B since Plan A doesn't work? For example, if a lesbian couple and their two children move in down the block, how would we respond if we ran into them buying school clothes for the kids at the local Wal-Mart, or met them at the parent teachers conference at our child's school? Would we look after their and their children's spiritual needs by inviting them to join the fellowship of our church?

BTW I agree that discipline is a good thing. As a graduate of the Air Force Academy, the four years of discipline was certainly beneficial.

ThroneofGrace ,

We all have our demons, that's for sure, many of our own making. But I don't see how being born one way or another would qualify. There's nothing intrinsically good or bad about being born gay any more than it is being born male or female. It's how we live our lives that is important. We won't exclude all women from redemption. Why would we exclude all gays? If a gay couple is raising a family, don't they deserve the same community support that all families do?


There is no dispute among health, mental health and education professionals that sexual orientation is determined by genetic and hormonal factors that occur during prenatal development. Those who claim otherwise have consistently refused to subject these treatments to rigorous scientific research which would test the veracity of what hey are claiming. In contrast, there are many studies which highlight the great harm that is done by trying to convince someone to pretend to be something they are not. The American Psychiatric Association considers the harm that the attempt to change one's sexual orientation can do makes these practices unethical.

DavidB said: "All attempts to prove some genetic link to homosexuality have been disproven, not that they aren't trying."

There is always some confusion about a genetic link and actually finding the genes involved.

It is not necessary to find the genes involved to prove a genetic link. The genes for eye color, for example have yet to be found, but we know that eye color is inherited. Sexual orientation follows the same pattern of heredity as handedness.

More importantly, homosexuality was removed by the APA after two decades of studies found no relation between children's upbringing and a person's adult orientation. If there isn't even a correlation, then one can't possibly cause the other. With no environment causes evident, it has to be genetic by default.

JGrubbs wrote,

This is the same APA that prior to 1973 had homosexuality listed as a mental disorder in their books.

Well, no, that was the other APA. In any case, here's how these changes came about:
Homosexuality was once thought to be a mental illness because mental health professionals and society had biased information. In the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined data about these people who were not in therapy, the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was quickly found to be untrue.

Science continually revises and updates it's practices based on the latest research. Cancer treatments today are much better than those of thirty years ago. Churches are also free to update their practices based on the realities that science provides us. Some do and some don't.

There is no "gay gene"!

Well, actually, there doesn't have to be a gay gene at all! Orientation could simply depend on the selection between sets of genes we already have.


Your said, "Everytime there's a [gene] study with "proof", that study is examined by the scientific community and rejected for a number of reasons."

I'm not getting my point across, I see. The gene studies you refer to have nothing to do with the fact that orientation is innate which is the conclusion of over 50 years of research that lead to the delisting of homosexuality from the DSM over 30 years ago.

Finding a gene might be "nice," but, like eye color or handedness (did you read the paper I referred to above), establishing genetic links is not dependent on finding the location of the specific gene.

Ooh, there's more, I can't keep up. Check it out yourself.

Saturday, April 01, 2006


Leader in Trouble?

Key anti-gay leader found with underaged male prostitute. Details here.