Not far from Truth Wins Out’s international headquarters!

Weekly Column

Anti-gay activists have long considered 1993’s Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell compromise one of their most prized victories. In one fell swoop, they humiliated President Bill Clinton, flexed their political muscle, and put lesbian and gay people in their place.

What the extremists never understood was that Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell was their movement’s death knell. This bitter fight elevated gay rights to a national issue for the first time in history. Prior to 1993, discussions about LGBT people were usually spoken in hushed tones. Suddenly, gay people were photographed on the cover of magazines, quoted in the A Section of newspapers, and interviewed on television news programs (not just the daytime talk shows). The nation was introduced to honorable role models such as Tracy Thorne, the Top Gun pilot with movie star looks, (pictured)  and Vietnam Bronze Star recipient Grethe Cammermeyer.

The national March on Washington occurred at roughly the same time, offering an opportunity for thousands of people, emboldened by the gays in the military debate, to come out of the closet in a safe and inspiring atmosphere.

Up until that moment, the public, the media, and religious institutions had decided to render gay people invisible or portrayed them as sinful circus acts. There was virtually no effort to show homosexuals as multi-dimensional people who led complete, fulfilling lives.

The first Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell loss was actually a victory (except for the 14,000 brave gay troops who were fired) because it destroyed the taboo of homosexuality. At that moment, LGBT people became an identifiable group to mainstream Americans and were firmly ingrained in public consciousness.

Seventeen years later, the scare tactics of the opposition were rendered ineffective because people had friends and family members who were openly gay. Even the majority of the troops said they thought they had served with gay service members.

This time around, our gay spokespeople were seen as dignified and patriotic, while the opposition appeared freakish, paranoid, and melodramatic. America looked at our opponents and asked, “What are you so scared of? Your fears are misplaced and, quite frankly, weird.”

There was one striking difference in this year’s tussle. In 1993, it was the politicians who were trying to get out in front of public opinion. In 2010, two-thirds of the public was squarely in favor of repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, yet many elected officials were bucking the views of their constituents to appease anti-gay special interests.

The unsettling disconnect between the majority of Americans and some members of Congress – overwhelmingly Republican — who kowtow to hardcore litmus test voters, remains a real problem that will be exacerbated in 2011 when Republicans take over the House. Indeed, passing the bill took a massive lobbying effort, which included Washington insiders and new direct action groups. The legislation only made it through at the last possible moment – flaring tempers and fraying nerves.

President Bill Clinton’s painful experience with gays in the military led Obama to be overly cautious, almost killing repeal efforts. His go slow approach was frustrating and, at times, infuriating. But, in the end, he will be judged by what happens on his watch — and his efforts just earned him an upgrade from a Casio to a Rado.

To get the Rolex, he will have to sign a law prohibiting employment discrimination and abolish the odious Defense of Marriage Act. Still, the President did enough to temporarily quell bubbling anger in the LGBT community, while earning himself a degree of trust. He said he would end this heinous policy – and he did. Few people will remember the details and history will celebrate the signing ceremony, which signaled a major victory for the LGBT movement and the Obama administration.

However, expectations will be higher now that the ghost of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell has been slain. The integration of openly gay soldiers will prove to be a non-event, (like gay people marrying in 5 states) giving wavering Democrats and moderate Republicans few excuses not to vote for equality in the future.

As for our foes, they will be in disarray and have to live with the inconvenient fact that their gloom and doom scenarios never came to pass. And, they will soon have to watch their worst nightmare come to fruition, as heroic openly gay and lesbian soldiers stand on elevated platforms to receive medals for saving lives in the heat of battle.

It is telling that the week ended with former president Jimmy Carter, an observant evangelical Christian, saying he thought America would soon be ready for a gay president. With this week’s historic victory – suddenly anything looks possible.

The New York Times reports:

The Pentagon has concluded that allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the United States armed forces presents a low risk to the military’s effectiveness, even at a time of war, and that 70 percent of service members believe that the impact of repealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law would be either positive, mixed or of no consequence at all.

In an exhaustive nine-month study on the effects of repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the 17-year-old policy that requires gay service members to keep their sexual orientation secret or face discharge, the authors concluded that while in the short run a repeal would most likely bring about “some limited and isolated disruption to unit cohesion and retention,” it could be mitigated by effective leadership.

The report, by Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon’s chief counsel, and Gen. Carter F. Ham, the commander of the United States Army in Europe, also found that much of the concern in the armed forces about openly gay service members was driven by misperceptions and stereotypes. Leaving aside those with moral and religious objections to homosexuality, the authors said that the concerns were “exaggerated and not consistent with the reported experiences of many service members.”

So, the objections are driven by misperceptions and stereotypes. That sound about right — except it is really anti-gay propaganda deliberately designed to scare people.

With the release of this report, is it the beginning of the end for the miserable and pernicious DADT policy? Or, will Republicans find a way to stall until the lame duck session of Congress is over, essentially sinking repeal?

I’d be curious to get your thoughts.

Way back in May, I wrote that the LGBT movement had reached a tipping point. Truth Wins Out may have been the first organization in the nation to make this bold claim, placing us in the vanguard of prognostication. Of course, that is why people come to this website and support Truth Wins Out. We are consistently ahead of the curve in predicting trends. Such prescience is not an accident, but a direct result of diligent research, analyzing the facts, and capitalizing on the creativity afforded a smaller organization.

The trend I articulated was confirmed in a major Associated Press story by David Crary. According to the report:

Right now, though, the gay rights movement is at a tipping point, as epitomized by Bowling Green’s divisive referendum on extending anti-discrimination protections to gays. The vote was so close that it took three extra weeks to determine whether the two measures passed.

Nationally, gay-rights supporters and their conservative opponents are trading victories and setbacks, and the public is deeply divided on same-sex marriage. Could the push for full equality be stalled or reversed? Probably not, if public opinion evolves at its current pace.

“All you have to do is look at the demographics and you can see this is as inevitable as anything,” said Michael Klarman, a Harvard Law School professor who has studied the civil rights and gay rights movements.

In my view, this was one of the best reports of the year. It was well-researched, smart, captured the moment, and highlighted the magnificent opportunities and treacherous challenges that lie ahead. It showed that we are on a path to victory, but winning is only assured if we fight like junk yard dogs against religious extremists who will clutch their bigotry like a security blanket and refuse to give it up. As I stated in this week’s column, we have a long series of battles ahead, but demographics, trends, history and public opinion are now on our side. But, the one lesson we must take away is that we can never take equality for granted. We will have to fight tooth and nail for every square inch of our freedom.

Anyway, kudos to David Crary for producing one of the rare media reports that accurately depicts the fight for equality.

Check out the interview on Facebook or on David Pakman’s website. If you have never heard his show, check it out – it is one of the best out there.

Last week, I commented on how the “ex-gay” group Exodus International had a sluggish year where, at times, it seemed as they had dropped off the radar. It turns out that Exodus had gone into hibernation since the summer to ask God for direction. According to a new letter written to Exodus supporters from Executive Director Alan Chambers:

As is the case every year about this time, my team and I are gearing up for a new year!  We have been in meetings regularly since August praying and talking about how and where God is leading Exodus International in 2011 and beyond. Some years we roll out big new endeavors and introduce big ideas that God has given us.  This year, however, God isn’t calling us to do anything new.

God’s call to do nothing sat well with me, considering Exodus was already losing relevance. Unfortunately, I continued reading and was was alarmed that Exodus’ top goal in 2011 is to recruit school children as young as eleven years old (Middle School age). The organization plans to lure these children by investing in high-tech gadgets and new media. According to the online letter:

…the greatest area of need in our culture is outreach to young people.  We will be changing the name of Exodus Youth to Exodus Student Ministries in order to encompass middle school thru [sic] college age students.

We have listened to youth pastors, parents and especially students and we want to amplify our message in a way that they will best receive it: via web communication, YouTube, podcasts and short to the point booklets. We are also in the process of creating an App for iPhone users.

Given the organization’s appalling record with youth, this organization has no business in schools or around anyone under the age of 21. Their message is hateful, intolerant, scientifically bankrupt and may lead to teens harming themselves — including the potential for depression, drug abuse and even suicide.

Disconcertingly, many of Exodus’ “counselors” have virtually no professional training and the organization does not employ rigorous standards when they pair up vulnerable youth with adults. The results of Exodus’ lack of professionalism has, at times, been devastating.

The so-called “ex-gay” organization has forced youth, against their will, into its programs. The most notable example is Zach Stark, a 16-year-old Tennessee boy, who in 2005 was forced into Exodus’ “Refuge” boot camp, run by member ministry Love In Action. Zach Stark made international news when he posted his predicament on MySpace:

Somewhat recently, as many of you know, I told my parents I was gay… Well today, my mother, father, and I had a very long “talk” in my room where they let me know I am to apply for a fundamentalist christian program for gays. They tell me that there is something psychologically wrong with me, and they “raised me wrong.” I’m a big screw up to them, who isn’t on the path God wants me to be on. So I’m sitting here in tears, joing the rest of those kids who complain about their parents on blogs – and I can’t help it.

The uproar over the incident prompted Exodus into closing down the notorious Refuge program. Similarly, on October 6, 2010, Exodus shuttered its noxious Day of Truth program which mocked the Day of Silence, an annual event where students take a vow of silence in support of LGBT friends who are bullied.

Exodus took this extraordinary step following a high profile string of suicides, tacitly admitting that its program exacerbated homophobia and bullying in schools.

“Even though we have reached a fair number of students”, said Chambers, “We believe that due to the timing of the event, Day of Truth was always perceived in an adversarial manner, and became more about policy than people.

One of the more disturbing aspects of Exodus is the tendency to place youth in programs alongside sexual reprobates. On the March 15, 2007 the Montel Williams Show featured former Exodus client Lance Carroll who spoke out about his harrowing experience with Exodus:

“I went to one of your organizations,” said Carroll, who was speaking directly to Exodus’ Alan Chambers. “I was in a group with a convicted sexual offender.” (See video 1:10 mark)

Lance Carroll is not alone. Exodus clearly has an ongoing predator problem that it must seriously address before it makes brainwashing youth its foremost priority in 2011.

Patrick McAlvey was also an Exodus client at the age of 19. He visited Exodus’ Lansing affiliate Corduroy Stone where he was counseled by Mike Jones. During counseling, McAlvey was asked about the size of his member and made to engage in erotic cuddling. He spoke out about the experience in a Truth Wins Out video:

‘Ex-gay’ survivor Jaylen Braiden was taken advantage of by an Exodus team leader at Desert Stream Ministries [DSM]. This counselor later got in trouble for sexually abusing other minors. Exodus’ Alan Chambers has yet to come clean and publicly discuss the Desert Stream Ministries scandal.

However, on March 8, 2010 Desert Stream founder Comiskey wrote a blog post entitled “Falling Mercies” where he says DSM had been, “cast out of our home church”, Vineyard Anaheim, as a result of “a darker strain of sin in our own ranks.” He goes onto reveal that this sin was, “a longstanding staff person from Desert Stream had sexually abused at least one teenager who had sought help from us.”

Aside from the very real prospect of youth being placed with unsavory characters who appear to be unmonitored and unfiltered, the message of Exodus is destructive. The organization tells youth that they are sexually broken, sinful, counterfeit, satanic or perverse.

Spiritual warfare is a common part of Exodus’ rhetoric.

In a 2005 Exodus Newsletter Chambers said:

“One of the many evils this world has to offer is the sin of homosexuality. Satan, the enemy, is using people to further his agenda to destroy the Kingdom of God and as many souls as he can.”

At the “Family Impact Summit,” a right wing conference in Brandon, Florida held on Sept. 21, 2007, Chambers told the crowd of social conservatives:

“We have to stand up against an evil agenda. It is an evil agenda and it will take anyone captive that is willing, or that is standing idly by.”

To lure youths, Exodus resorts to outright lying about LGBT life. For example, Chambers says that that gay life is only for the young:

Chambers also misleads by falsely claiming that gay life will disappoint.

Given the recent uptick in gay suicides and understanding that hate leads to bullying in schools, it is grossly irresponsible for Exodus, given its reprehensible record — to target youth. Before parents hand their children over to this organization or get them an i-phone application, they should know the whole truth about this notorious organization.

Bill Smith is the Deputy Executive Director of Gill Action Fund. In the Advocate, he offered a thoughtful analysis of the LGBT landscape in the post-election environment.

However, I do have a few questions.

Bill: Although it’s been said before, it bears repeating — we must get out of the partisan ghetto and insist that LGBT rights are human rights, not partisan positions. When we allow ourselves to be seen simply as agents of the Democratic Party, we’re building barriers that impede progress with thoughtful Republicans, who we will almost always need to win. We also need thoughtful LGBT Republicans, who do the hard work of having difficult conversations with other Republicans without being apologists for antigay voices. Our freedom to marry, to serve our country, and to work to support our families transcends politics, and we must confidently and positively make our case with equal vigor to Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike.

Wayne: Are we really in the partisan ghetto by choice? I genuinely can’t think of one instance where an LGBT organization had the vote of a member of the GOP and said, “Let’s reject this vote because we don’t like the “R” in front of his or her name.” I’d challenge anyone to find one instance where this has occurred.

Having worked at the Human Rights Campaign from 1998-2003, I can tell you that we went out of our way to engage in bipartisanship, even when it pissed off the LGBT community. I was there when HRC endorsed New York Republican Sen. Alfonse D’Amato. I can’t describe the terror of having hundreds of apoplectic New Yorkers screaming on the phone because they hated the endorsement. I’m still having flashbacks and nightmares!

My point is, the bipartisan thing has been tried in earnest at the federal level for quite some time. It has not worked. During this period, the GOP has moved further to the margins. The number of thoughtful Republicans has diminished and are close to becoming an endangered species. Should we keep trying? Of course, because we can use the support, and having conservatives on-board, such as Ted Olson, has helped our cause.

But as long as the Republican Party has to answer to the Family Research Council or Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) our ability to rise above the partisan ghetto will remain rather limited.

Furthermore, the battle for LGBT equality may be snagged on the Republican obsession with undermining the Obama administration (They won’t even meet with him) and making him a one-term president. The GOP leadership might conclude that if LGBT people fail to gain equality under Obama, they will be upset and more likely to stay home or vote Republican in 2012. If the Republicans can oppose Obama on a huge issue dealing with national security, like an arms control treaty with Russia, they can stomp on ENDA without blinking.

So, my question is, what will be tried to woo Republicans that has not been tried before?

Bill: It’s past time to rethink our federal presence in Washington. It’s broken and it has to be fixed before another two years go by.

Wayne: Wow, this is actually newsworthy. The powerful Gill Foundation is sending a direct message to The Human Rights Campaign that they are not happy with the results in Washington. Does this signal a strategic shift where Gill will get more involved at the national level or fund a proxy? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

In terms of DC, it seems to me that LGBT leaders have been able to get into the door and sit in the corridors of power. The problem is, we have often walked out of the room empty handed or with a bare minimum. What the Gill Foundation should do is hire the nation’s top negotiators to train LGBT Executive Directors on how to bargain effectively. There should be mock White House and congressional meetings where these experts show us how to maximize negotiations and leverage our power. Negotiating is an extremely difficult art, but these are skills that can be learned and nurtured.

Bill: It’s time to model our federal campaigns after successful organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the National Rifle Association that understand building and using political capital while insisting on results. There is no legitimate reason we shouldn’t have the ability to be successful on multiple issues simultaneously while not allowing ourselves to be pushed off the agenda by fickle or shell-shocked allies.

Wayne: This is a good idea and one previously stated by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). It is a productive exercise to study other lobbies and learn from their success — and failures. There are certainly ways we can improve and grow as a movement and AIPAC and the NRA are good models to observe and dissect. However, there are obvious limits that will keep us from ever having the clout of these groups.

For example, there are as many as 80 million gun owners in America. There are not 80 million LGBT people in America, and if there were, we would be as powerful as the NRA and would have achieved equal rights at least a decade ago.

Comparisons to AIPAC also have limits. Democrats support this lobby because most Jewish Americans are liberal and reliable party voters. Republicans support Israel for two reasons. The first is because the Religious Right wants Israel in the hands of the Jews, to fulfill prophesy of Jesus returning. The second is because the business wing of the GOP can reward defense contractors by building weapons systems for Israel.

While the LGBT movement can influence Democrats, it does not have the crossover appeal, such as AIPAC, in the Republican Party. As I explained earlier, any true embrace of the LGBT movement creates a messy showdown for the GOP with the Religious Right.

Finally, AIPAC and the NRA have relatively homogeneous constituencies that are more easily organized than the unruly and diverse coalition that makes up the LGBT movement. Would these groups maintain such enviable unity if they were juggling transgender concerns, GOProud types, Dykes on Bikes and the black tie dinner crowd? Make no mistake, our LGBT leaders have extremely difficult jobs.

Bill: We must be serious about holding elected officials’ feet to the fire and avoid wallowing in victimhood when they don’t deliver. We must communicate clearly with our friends about what we expect, push them harder than we’re comfortable with until they deliver results, and thank them appropriately when we win. And when they betray our trust or vote against us, fight like hell to beat them. LGBT New Yorkers didn’t accept the results of last December’s awful vote against marriage equality, they got organized. Through Fight Back New York and other organizations, they defeated three antimarriage senators (of both parties) and replaced them with three strong allies. Steadily using this formula will build both respect and a healthy dose of fear for the perils of crossing LGBT voters.

Wayne: These are all good points and the Gill Foundation has done a terrific job in targeted races. The larger questions are — Can these efforts in New York be duplicated in Michigan or Mississippi? What leverage do we have in such places? Can we deliver enough money or votes to make a difference?

Bill: Yes, there were significant losses, and unfortunately another truth about the LGBT community is that we sometimes wallow in our defeats. We have the opportunity now to use the wins of Election Day  to triumph over the adversity of the losses. To do that we must make the all too familiar choice: Get busy winning or spend time wallowing. I for one am ready to get busy winning.

Wayne: But crying in my beer is so much fun!

Seriously, political circumstances change, but we must keep working and fighting so the march of progress moves forward.

Sign Change.Org Petition HERE

Does the World Bank think that your sexual orientation can be cured? Well, maybe not officially, but that’s not stopping the World Bank from funneling money to an organization that not only tries to convert people from homosexuality to heterosexuality, but also has ties to Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill. Perhaps the World Bank is adjusting their mission statement: “Working for a World Free of Poverty … and Free of Gay People.”

As Metro Weekly’s Chris Geidner writes, the World Bank has allowed a controversial ex-gay group — Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) — to join the ranks of its Community Outreach Program, a workplace-giving campaign that allows employees of the World Bank to give money to an organization, and have that money matched by a contribution from the World Bank. Depending on how many employees decide to give money to PFOX, the World Bank will give anywhere from 50 percent to 100 percent in a matching donation.

Which means that in the months ahead, the World Bank will be giving money directly to an organization that believes homosexuality can be cured. On top of that, as Truth Wins Out notes, a former PFOX board member, Richard Cohen (who still serves as a therapy guru to the organization), was intimately involved in efforts to create legislation in Uganda that would punish homosexuality with the death penalty or life imprisonment.

And it gets even shadier. The director of PFOX’s Speakers Bureau, Abba Goldberg, is a convicted felon who was sentenced to a year and a half in prison for bilking poor communities with bond schemes. And PFOX has also had its tactics condemned by the worldwide psychological and medical profession, with leaders from the organization being thrown out of professional groups like the American Counseling Association for violating ethical protocols.

Wow, if the World Bank is willing to lend credence to an organization like PFOX, what does it say about their overall credibility? For the World Bank, it looks like corporate social responsibility equals corporate endorsement of curing gay people.

What’s also particularly troubling about the World Bank’s endorsement of PFOX is that it looks like the Bank made an exception in order to squeeze PFOX under its Community Outreach Program guidelines. Under those guidelines, a qualifying organization is supposed to have “a substantial local presence in the Greater Washington metropolitan area.” But a 2009 report by the Washington City Paper revealed that PFOX has no presence in D.C.; moreover, the organization’s headquarters are in Reedville, Virginia — a whopping 127 miles from Washington, D.C.

“It is factually incorrect to say that PFOX has a ‘substantial local presence in DC’”, said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “Either PFOX is committing fraud against the World Bank, or they are receiving special rights from the organization and inexplicably allowed to pass as a local organization.”

The World Bank has some serious explaining to do, Lucy. Of course, if you listen to World Bank spokespeople, they say that their support of PFOX shouldn’t be considered an endorsement of PFOX’s work. And if you believe that, I think there’s a bridge in Alaska that’s for sale, too.

“‘Because Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) met the minimum criteria for inclusion on the Community Connections campaign, they were included this year,” said a spokesperson for the World Bank, according to Metro Weekly. Ah, such bureaucratic speak for such a serious issue.

Send the World Bank a message that their decision to include PFOX in the Community Outreach Program is as offensive as it is tactless. This is an organization that uses manipulation and discredited psychological tactics to “cure” people of their sexual orientation, has ties to an anti-gay bill in Uganda that could wipe out an entire population of gay people, and who has a leadership that includes people with shady criminal ties. Is that really the type of “charity” the World Bank wants to lend credence to?

Sign Petition Now

While we were all busy celebrating Hallowe’en this weekend, I somehow managed to hear about this:

One of the mail bombs sent by terrorists in Yemen was addressed to a small, gay-friendly synagogue in Chicago.

Or Chadash leases spaces in Emmanuel Congregation’s lakefront synagogue on the North Side.

“We have a highly visible lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual community and at first we thought that might have attracted attention,” Lilli Kornblum, the Co-President of Or Chadash told FOX Chicago News. “But as we learned that more packages were sent, we now don’t take it personally, Well, we are taking it personally as human beings and as Jews but it seems we were randomly selected from any number of Jewish organizations in Chicago.”

Scary.  But we’re not wingnuts, so I assume we’ll all continue checking the mail every day, right?  Good.

PZ Myers points us to something truly hilarious.  Apparently one of the Illinois Family Institute’s Laurie Higgins’ kids went to Gustavus Adolphus, a small Lutheran college in Minnesota, and Laurie has witnessed something horrible (terrible! outrageous!) that went on at their freshman orientation:  a humorous, honest discussion of sex, in skit form!  You see, in part of it, a couple has sex and uses a condom, which is evil; and then a gay student tells his friend that he’s gay, and the friend does not bully him, which is what Laurie supports; and then, a group of students with silly names talk about how abstinence is good, but if you don’t abstain, here are some things that you should do to make it safer, and there’s nothing worse than people making responsible choices when they have sex; worst of all, the ones who don’t have sex say they MASTURBATE, and they laugh about it on the stage, and the other kids laugh too!; et cetera.

What Laurie is really upset about in these videos is that the kids are being honest, funny, and aren’t flailing about with guilt at the mere mention of the word sex. Watch the first video, which MAY NOT be safe for work, and then we’ll listen to some of Laurie’s WAAAAHMbulance, together:

Okay, so fun, silly video, right? College freshmen are hormonal beasts, but they’re also not stupid, so it’s better to acknowledge it, laugh about it, encourage people to make smart choices, and a good time will be had by all.

Laurie is so upset:

Two videos of a freshmen orientation presentation at Gustavus Adolphus College, a small Lutheran College in St. Peter, Minnesota, have come to light that expose the repugnant ideas and images that college students at a purportedly Christian college think are funny.

NOTHING is funny when you’re a Fundamentalist! Did Jesus laugh? NO! He WEPT!

The first video begins with a couple having sex in their dorm room (complete with sound effects) and joking about putting a hat on the door to warn the boy’s roommate to stay out — for the fourth time in one week.

What?! A couple in college? Having sex FOUR TIMES in one week?! What are they, ANIMALS?

Laurie’s biggest complaints, though, are about this next video, where LGBT students are explicitly supported and affirmed.  This is all, of course, awful and terrible, because again, Laurie basically supports hurting gay kids; to be clear, I doubt Laurie really wants bats taken to gay kids’ heads, but would rather suggest that for her and for her ideological cohorts, the gay kids that are bullied, beaten, or driven to suicide are simply collateral damage.  What they really want can be ranked sort of like this:

1.  Gay kids, in shame, deny who they are, and live fake, painful lives where they never experience fulfillment.

2.  Some gay kids do #1, while those who are obstinate about it probably deserve what’s coming to them, for not seeing the “wisdom” of the disproven, scientifically bankrupt Fundamentalist Christian worldview.  Bullying, beating, suicide…sad to them, but not as sad as #3.

3.  Gay kids allowed to grow up happy, healthy and beautiful, just as they are, thus existing, as so many millions of us do, as the negation of the Fundamentalist Christian worldview.

The second half of the video is an egregious violation of Fundamentalist Christian Ethics and Morality, as it is a dramatic portrayal of the need for all people to accept and love one another, and Jesus woulda never said anything like that.  None of the college freshmen in attendance had ever heard of gay people, and if they had only gone to the College Of Laurie Higgins’ Pursed Lips, they’d all be straight virgins today.

So now Laurie has some questions for Gustavus Adolphus, one of which can be filed under Walking Up To Tyler Clementi’s Funeral and Pissing On His Grave. Let’s hit that one first:

Does anyone see how the exhibitionism, voyeurism, and promiscuity which this freshman orientation presentation embodies and promotes relate to the Tyler Clementi tragedy at Rutgers University?

Oh wow, Higgins. You are truly a grotesque woman. You see, Tyler’s shame at being exposed most likely came from his Christian upbringing and the internalized homophobia that comes from that. Gay people don’t hate themselves in a vacuum, Higgins. People like you and your malcontent cohorts in life have to be there to inject homophobia into the discourse. You probably won’t be around to see it, but there will come a day when homophobia is exactly as socially unacceptable as Ku Klux Klan-style bigotry, and it will be amazing how the gay teen suicide rate plummets. Without “Christian” teaching, these kids won’t learn to hate themselves. Bullies won’t learn to hate gay kids. Bullies who are struggling with their sexuality won’t learn to hate themselves, leading them to perceive those who are not struggling as a threat. It will be a much more beautiful world.

What values does this freshmen re-orientation presentation foster? Does it demonstrate respect for the dignity of people, or does it degrade people?

It respects dignity, indeed, for people to make their own choices, responsibly, while fostering a climate of acceptance for people who are different. Apparently in Laurie’s world, dignity goes hand in hand with a chastity belt and a climate of shame.

Do the upperclassmen recognize that one of the most important forms of diversity in life-philosophical diversity-is missing from their puerile production? There is no representation of the view that modesty matters. There is no representation of the view that pornography is evil and the use of it destructive to the moral imaginations, lives, and marriages of men and women. There is no representation of the view that homosexuality and sadomasochism are perversions.

First of all, that would make for a sucky skit. It wouldn’t be funny, and it wouldn’t respect the diversity of the student body. As a sidenote, fundamentalists are always whining like babies about how their families, their worldview, are never portrayed by the eeeeeevil lib’rul Hollywood primetime teevee shows. They think it’s because people are attacking their way of life, but it’s not that — it’s that they’re not entertaining. They’re boring.

But all of that aside, the videos DO encourage abstinence, for those who choose it. They encourage safe sex for those who choose it. They encourage the gay kids, the straight kids, the bisexual kids, the transgender kids…all of them.

Also, there is no empirical evidence for the idea of homosexuality as a “perversion,” so it obviously has no place in an institution of higher learning. I know the videos would work out better for Laurie if they condemned homosexuality, because it probably would warm her black heart to imagine the gay kids in the audience feeling hurt and ashamed, but again, this a Christian university with a commitment to learning. No Bronze Age babble, please.

Anyway, kids, isn’t it nice to know that even some Christian colleges are working to foster an educational environment rife with tolerance, love and respect for others?

There’s hope for Christendom, there is.