Posted
by Wick Thomas
April 5, 2007 at 12:54 a.m.
Equality Ride 2007
I feel sick. There are few times in my life when I can remember being physically sick due to something emotional. This is at a completely new level, though. For those of you who don't know, right now, I'm participating in the Equality Ride. It's a nation-wide bus trip to religious colleges which ban or discriminate against lgbt students. This has been an incredibly hard trip. I knew I would be facing a lot of trials on this ride. What I didn't account for was that I would have to watch as my friends face these trials, as well.
The training for the Equality Ride was very difficult. To grow as a group, we had a lot of lessons in diversity and sensitivity. I was forced to confront lingering issues with racism and transphobia that I didn't realize I still had. In the spirit of the freedom rides, and with the direction of the Rev. Phil Lawson, brother to James Lawson of the original Freedom Rides, we participated in some of the same training that they had gone through. One of these trainings involved lining up in front of each other and yelling horrible things that we knew we would hear on this trip. Tears were brought to my eyes watching this happen. I guess that should have shown me then how hard this trip would be.
We have only stopped at three schools and already it has been such an incredible experience. Notre Dame, a very prestigious school, arrested us for being on campus. The next stop felt that our arrest was in their best interest as well. MidAmerica Nazarene, however, was much more difficult of a stop. MidAmerica welcomed us on campus enthusiastically. Everyone treated us with respect and an incredible amount of kindness. The reason that MidAmerica was so hard is the realization that all of this outward hospitality that was shown is not echoed inwardly.
It was a very hard realization that many of the students, while smiling and chatting, feel that because of who we are, for something that is intrinsic within us, we are going to Hell. (Let's not even get started on the idea of Hell.) While in conversation with these students I was often equated with a murderer. Somehow, due to the education they have received, my ability to love is equal to someone else's ability to hate. These students think my existence is sinful.
It should be noted that we have met lgbt students on all of these campuses. And the fears they have about their schools are echoed at each subsequent stop. These students are afraid to be going to school. This discrimination being taught doesn't end at these schools. I have recently been in contact with someone from my hometown, who is just coming to terms with her sexuality. She is terrified, much like I was growing up in that town.
This is not where it ends. The reason I feel sick is because of my friends. There are two buses on this trip, one on the East Coast and one on the West. The East Coast bus just stopped in Waco, Texas. While at that stop many of the Equality Riders were arrested. They were taken to jail, given a cavity search, and their bail was set at $12,000. Their crime: trespassing.
The reason I feel sick, is that we live in a world, with all it's beauty, and that we are still able to do these things. We are able to destroy, deny, or degrade people because of who they are. We are willing to kill someone for who they love. Most of all I feel sick, because so few people are willing to do anything about it.
and 4 others
Comments
Lawrence.com does not necessarily agree with comments posted below - responsibility lies with the relevant user alone. Read our full policy.
betwixt (anonymous) says…
Wick you are doing something truly amazing. Not sure if I could be in your shoes and come out not hating the world myself. There is only so much anger that one black queer woman can hold in.
I hope that this ride shows the lgbt folks at these institutions that they are not alone, that ultimately they are not trapped in church doctrine. The desire to destroy, to degrade betrays their own shaky grasp on what it means to be human, to be humane.
Wicholas (Wick Thomas) says…
There are definitely times on this ride when the world gets a little bleak. It is so amazing to me to see the hurt that can be justified using scripture.
I think that one of the things that keeps me going is that after each of these stops, we have lgbt people from those schools email us and tell us that they now believe that they can keep their faith and thier identity.
mitzibel (Misty Nuckolls) says…
Yeah, my G-d mentions something about that in Leviticus, but He spends way more time trying to beat the idea of simply being good people into our heads. That's the message I, personally, try to carry away from it, and in my book, good people don't hate and discriminate.
Religion can be intoxicating, *especially* those religions that teach that they are the One True Path, and that everybody except for the members of the First United Reformed Church Of Christ In Jesus (Congregational) is going to burn in hell.
All I have to say, is, good work. It is a mark of the sheer amazingness of our society that there are people like you out there doing the work that you do. I hope you can come out the other end with your *own* faith in humanity intact.
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Dude.
Don't get rolled over by everyone else's hypocrisy. You might lose sight of your own. Courage is not courage if you just use it to enhance your victimhood.
Don't get me wrong. I respect what you are doing. But if YOU don't get it, who the fuck else is going to?
Compassion is a tricky thing.
ladylaw (Terry Bush) says…
Amen.
Since you are using "Freedom Riders" as a model, please keep in mind that the 60's civil rights actvists changed the nation precisely because they got arrested (or worse) in droves. And they did nothing to physically fight back. Some even died for their cause.
Their non-violent protest actions showed the whole world that the segregation and Jim Crow laws were unjust, by suffering bravely (and by the thousands) because they stepped over the lines and violated those laws. They did not try to escape the unjust penalties. They went to jail, over and over again. They were beaten, spit upon, kicked and called names that would make my blood turn cold. They openly suffered all of it, so that all the rest of society could see exactky what hate and racism looked like in action. And because they suffered, openly, the laws were changed as a result.
Their actions did not, however, change the hearts and minds of people who recoiled at anyone with darker skin. That still happens, maybe not as much or as covertly, but racism is alive and well and living in the hearts of many people who won't admit to it, even to themselves.
The "Fight" to make all people be loving and kind towards all other people is never going to be won. Perhaps b/c of "free will" - and because there is an apparently intrinsic need in many human souls to "be right" (i.e. know the truth - to the exclusion of all other ideas).
I think that one of the main things thing that can be done to "combat" hatred and bigotry or any other kind of mental wall, is to not become just like the people who exhibit such darkness.
Blessed are those who weep, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are those who are peacemakers, for they shall know peace.
This little light of mine... Let it shine shine shine.
mjbjlp (anonymous) says…
First off - I have a great deal of compassion for those struggling with sexuality issues. While every has the right to write about whatever they would like in a blog- I have to say that your insight on MNU was dead wrong and that some "inward" thinking should come from you looking in a mirror.
To me- It seems as though you thought it was acceptable for Notre Dame and University X to have you arrested. While it may have been unpleasant, it worked out well for you. They are the reason you are doing what you are doing. Shutting you out- not giving you a chance to express your opinion and share your thoughts because of your lifestyle is unacceptable. This should tarnish their reputation. However, with MNU- you were not arrested- you were welcomed. This was difficult for you because you were not a victim. You couldn't simply place blame on them; you had to give some thought to what they were saying--- even if only to show them the same respect they showed you. Perhaps that made you uncomfortable for a reason?
I would like to take a moment to correct a few things.
1. "The reason that MidAmerica was so hard is the realization that all of this outward hospitality that was shown is not echoed inwardly." They welcomed you to their campus and did not have you arrested, scream obscenities at you, or judge you. They simply listened (and probably quietly prayed). You are upset because their outwardly reactions did not mirror what you perceived to be going on internally- but have you ever looked at yourself? You are out to spread the word- to put an end to bigotry - which I whole heartedly support- but now that you were given a forum you are not satisfied because of what you feel they may be thinking? I challenge you, hold yourself to your own standards. Do your inward thoughts mirror your external actions? Is it the cause you really want to spread? Or is to - quite possibly - to prove you are a victim. (NOTE: I'm not arguing that you were a victim at schools like Notre Dame where you were arrested - but MNU, Come on.)
2. "While smiling and chatting, feel that because of who we are, for something that is intrinsic within us, we are going to Hell" This is what they believe. If you are out to share your beliefs and let the world hear them - then it should go both ways, right?
3. "These students think my existence is sinful". This is completely unfounded. You should choose your words more carefully. It is not your existence they find sinful- it is your actions. As you left their campus - they probably prayed for you and wished you well and comfort and solace in God. Your actions do not line up with their beliefs- in the same way that being arrested for being on the Notre Dame campus does not line up with yours. Let me tell you though- they are not the judges- even in their own minds- as corrupt as you may think they are.
MNU is honorable. They are firm in their beliefs - just as I hope you are.
Wicholas (Wick Thomas) says…
mitzibel- Thank you, your words are very encouraging.
thetom- I don't really feel that I'm trying to enhance victimhood through this. If that is how it seemed through my writing I apologize. While I recognize that I have been a victim of a system that is oppressive towards lgbt citizens, and am still a member of that system which does not view me as equal, I do not feel that I am a victim. I think there are some strange connotations surrounding that word.
ladylaw- I am very familiar with the Freedom Rides, but thank you for including that for those who might not be. (I suggest everyone do research on the more well known rides during the 60s and the lesser known in the 40's.) And I very much understand that these are not the same rides. I am very careful to say that we are inspired by the Freedom Rides, not that we are doing the same thing as the Freedom Rides. We are going into these institutions asking them to talk with us about our belief that homophobic doctrine and the false notion that we are sick and sinful is having damaging effects on people. I believe that as long as we consider it a "fight", then you are correct, this is something that will never happen. I do believe that asking everyone to challenge themselves in their beliefs is an effective way to make people more aware of who they are hurting though. I don't know if people are ever going to be loving and kind towards all other people, but I know if I am not active in trying to make that happen, then I am allowing that system to continue. And I very much agree with your last statement. I think it is so important to live by those standards to which you would ask others to.
Wicholas (Wick Thomas) says…
mjbj- I did not believe that it was acceptable for these institutions to arrest us. I genuinely want to talk to students in this endeavor, and I think the fact that we can be arrested for wanting to talk to students is proof that this work needs to be done.
"They welcomed you to their campus and did not have you arrested, scream obscenities at you, or judge you." When I read this it sounds as if you think this is something they should be congratulated for. I'm sorry if I read into that incorrectly, but for them to not do these things is not a commendable feat.
And throughout this several times it is referred to as what I perceive them to be thinking. It is not a perception. We listen as much as we talk on this ride, and I know the views of the people I talked to on that campus. I'm glad you asked if I have had the chance to look at myself. I think one of the things I am happiest about due to this ride is the things I have learned about myself. There have been many opportunities for introspection, and through those I have realized new ways in which I have been supporting an oppressive system. I very much try to live my life through the non-violence training that I have received, and try very hard to eliminate the different forms of violence in my life.
I am not on this ride to prove I am a victim. I might share my story, in which I have been victimized by the current system in place, but that is a reality in my life, It is not something however, that I am out to prove. (cont'd)
Wicholas (Wick Thomas) says…
I understand that this is what they believe. I also understand that this false notion is one of the reasons that lgbt teenagers make up 33% of the suicide rate, and the reason that many people feel they can't have both a faith and a sexual orientation or gender identity that is different than the majority. If you were on the campuses, you would be able to see that they express their beliefs just as often as we do. Both the campuses and the equality riders challenge each other at every opportunity. With the knowledge I have about the Bible and the intensive theological study that I have done I do believe that this notion is false and hurtful.
And my point was not unfounded. I am often very careful about my words, and that was no exception. If you look at the code at MNU and many other schools, you will find that it says "homosexual behavior." This is by no means specific, and I believe that is on purpose. Some of the schools go as far as to include "homosexual advocacy" as being against their code of ethics. In the contact that we had with a lesbian student on campus at MNU, and the many alumni we have talked to, we have been told that it is not a safe place to say that you are lgbt. These students were, and currently are, being forced to live a life in the closet on those campuses. Many of the students we talk to still view homosexuality as sinful, not just the sexual act but also the orientation. I am very sure that they prayed for us and that many of them still are, as many of the Equality Riders are still praying for the lives of those they met on campus.
I am very firm in my beliefs. That being said I also try to evaluate those beliefs at many opportunities, and challenge myself to grow in them. I do not however, think that a belief system in place at an academic institution should harbor so much fear and hatred. I believe MNU is honorable in many ways, but not in the fact that they single out an entire segment of people and hold them to a different standard than the rest of their students.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
I have been constantly amazed at how little most people know or understand about discrimmination based on sexual identity and gender expression, including lgbtqi-identifying people. Part of this is because of privilege, part of it is because of stubborness, part of it is because of blind acceptance of hurtful and blatantly untrue doctrines, part of it is genuine and pruposeful hatred.
(Love you, Wick. Welcome aboard.)
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Billy:
Whats amazing?
Walk into a room, or a campus, or a blog, and say to all the people who show up to meet you "I can't believe how ignorant you all are"! What do you expect?
"Part of this is privilege" The privilege of not carrying that particular burden? You exclude all others?
"Part of this is..stubborness" YES! Thats what I'm talking about!
"Part of it is because of blind acceptance of hurtful and blatantly untrue doctrines" Chances are, we share beliefs on religious doctrine. But when you activate based on the fact that someones religious beliefs are responsible for your pain then your whole premise is based on hypocrisy, and you will get nothing but deaf ears from people who share Wicks stated intent "I don't know if people are ever going to be loving and kind towards all other people, but I know if I am not active in trying to make that happen, then I am allowing that system to continue."
"Part of it is genuine and pruposeful hatred." Bingo. And thats what you foster when you propogandize the premise that christians are bad, lgbts are good.
If you think I'm ignorant, enlighten me. If you just want to thrash your righteous indignation around and call people stupid, then you can kiss my straight white married with children unigender ass. I got your schadenfreude right here.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
Thetomdot, I think, perhaps, you are taking some of the experiences of injustice and oppression people are sharing as personal attacks or class attacks against straights, whites, christians and/or males. This is just not the case. Gender activists are not on a crusade against any religious group. The organizers of the Equality Ride are actively trying to create a meaningful dialogue with the students at the schools they visit and the riders, who sometimes share religious belief with the students they talk with and some of whom have been cast out by their own families, congregations and civil governments. I, personally, harbor no hatred towards straight folks, christians, white folks or men, but I do point out unjust practices and social structures when I encounter them.
I would never set up a duality of good and bad, especially not between two things as difficult to compare as gender and religion. I don't believe in good and evil. I believe in justice and injustice, I believe in acceptance and occassionally I believe in understanding (but it is rare). I am sorry if someone has read a good and evil binary into my writing, but I don't believe in opposites, and I try not to think in terms as murky as good and bad (good for whom, why bad etc).
Also, people often forget that culture and religion are constantly changing. For example, my family is Catholic. That is to say the people I hold dearest in the world are mostly straight, white, Christians, some of whom are male. The Catholic religion as it is practiced today is a vastly different from what it was 200 years ago, muchless 2000 years ago. Religion is an agent in and reflective of culture.
The specific passage in the bible that outlaws a man laying with another man also outlaws eating pork and other hooved animals, touching a woman who has her period, and many other taboos that modern Christians don't practice. What is it, exaclty, that is so repulsive about queers?
Jesus was pretty faggy by todays standards of masculinity. He snuggled peter when he slept, he hung out with a group of men in dresses, he preffered the company of children to adults, he didn't seem to sleep with women, and he let other men wash his body. There may be no evidence he was gay, but there is also no evidence he is straight.
We don't all have to agree about what is moral. We don't all have to believe the same things. In fact, we can't. But we can all live our lives with an awareness of others and do so while respecting everyone's basic human rights which include reproductive and sexual freedom.
IE If you don't think homosexuality is okay with your God, then don't do it and let other people have dignity, agency and justice in their lives.
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Billy:
Thats two dots by the way. thetomdotdot, or preferably thetom..
Thanks.
"Jesus was pretty faggy by todays standards of masculinity."
Yeah, well, I play the piano (quite beautifully), so so am I.
Anyway, I was responding to your comment above which came off as flat arrogant to me.
If I'm wrong then so be it. My apology is offered in equal measure to your consideration that maybe I'm not.
"If you don't think homosexuality is okay with your God, then don't do it and let other people have dignity, agency and justice in their lives."
This is where I minds meet. Just for the record.
..
Wicholas (Wick Thomas) says…
Just replying to the part which I feel included me....
"But when you activate based on the fact that someones religious beliefs are responsible for your pain then your whole premise is based on hypocrisy, and you will get nothing but deaf ears from people who share Wicks stated intent "
You have not seen what has happened on these campuses. Many of these students are very willing to listen to our stories. Their beliefs on homosexuality are something that many of these people have never questioned themselves about, just accepted. Us coming onto the schools, telling these students our stories, and knowing a whole lot about the Bible I do not believe falls on deaf ears.
I am right there with the idea that if your religious beliefs don't affect me, then I have no problem with them. Unfortunately these have, and will continue to affect me and many people who I love. We are trying above all to come from a place of love and non-violence on this trip, and telling someone the are ignorant is something I would not do here.
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
If you are setting out to humanize lbgt for people that have been pretending it doesn't exist (or have lbgt friends in the closet), then I applaud you and wish you success. It is heartening to hear you say it is having an effect.
But if by "knowing a whole lot about the bible" you are setting out to "correct" fundamentalist christian views on morality, then yes, you exercise a level of arrogance that undermines the integrity of your effort.
Unless you can have it both ways. If so, then never mind.
El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) says…
TT.., I figured you'd be here...
Welcome aboard, Wick. I love the picture, btw.
OnShakedown (Chris Tackett) says…
thought i'd share this for the sake of conversation, and perhaps also as a sign that the times 'are a-changing'
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticl...
mitzibel (Misty Nuckolls) says…
Billy--just to clear it up: "The specific passage in the bible that outlaws a man laying with another man also outlaws eating pork and other hooved animals, touching a woman who has her period, and many other taboos that modern Christians don't practice. "
I also find this odd, since (to my understanding, anyway, and I'm probably wrong) many Christians believe that with Jesus' sacrifice, those old rules (which were binding to Jews only, btw, the rest of humanity was just held to the Big Seven--don't murder, cheat, steal, talk sincere smack on G-d, or worship statues, and fer tit's sake have just laws) are no longer binding. The whole Old covenant versus New Covenant thing---I know from listening to too many preachers every week that this varies greatly by denomination.
And I know that there are plenty of devil's advocates on this discussion already, but I feel I have to make a point. These are religious institutions, not public. They are free to make whatever rules they please, and their students are free to attend a different institution. I *totally* agree with the purpose of outreach to those students who feel alienated and even damned by their faith's institutions, but I don't know how much progress you're going to make trying to force an established institution, the leaders of which genuinely feel that the rules they enforce are not their own, but their G-d's, to change their policy. I don't even think that it would be right to do so. Freedom of religion, unfortunately, also means the freedom to be an asshatted bigot becasue of that religion, and there's not a damn thing any of us can do about that, not and keep our own freedoms intact. Phred Phelps is free to hate gays, J.C. Ford of the laughably-titled "Caring G-d" program is free to tell me every week that I killed Jesus and will therefore burn in Hell, you and I are free to believe that our G-d couldn't *possibly* be as petty as these dicktards seem to think he is. Is your mission about supporting and advocating for those who feel rejected by their faiths, or about trying to force those faiths to change their beliefs and practices so that they don't hurt anyone's feelings?
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Misty:
Thanks for illuminating my point. Now get out of my head. ;)
El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) says…
Misty: "I also find this odd, since ... many Christians believe that with Jesus' sacrifice, those old rules ... are no longer binding."
Let me play the fundamentalist here and see if I can clear up the confusion.
The OT is in a very large way a contract between God and Israel for the ownership of the promised land. God promised to protect Israel and they in turn promised to obey the law. When they wandered too far away, God allowed them to be oppressed (see: Judges) and finally removed from the land (see: Lamentations).
And there is much in the law that existed for no other purpose than to make Israel different than her neighbors, a nation set apart for God. Why does God care that people have blue fringes on their garments (Num 15:38)? Is blue magical or righteous? Nope. There's no real reason other than that their difference from the neighboring polytheists is to remind them that they are a people set apart and were not to dress, act, or think like others.
The Christian church, being for the most part a gentile organization, has no part in the land and therefore no part in the law. So that part is not so much "done away" as "it doesn't apply." Christians are not held to the law because that's not our contract.
But there is a part of the law that is not that way, but deals with human interaction as God designed it and us (don't steal, don't murder, etc.). Those things remain right or wrong outside the law. They were right or wrong before Moses and they are right or wrong after Jesus.
The whole argument over extramarital sex (and don't be misled, lbgt is simply a subset of sex outside of marriage-as-designed) for the Christian is a matter of whether it falls into the first category or the second. Billy's argument attempts to put it into the first, most Christians put it firmly into the second.
If Christians use Deuteronomy as a proof text, it's because that's a convenient summary, and the Billys of the world are perfectly correct in pointing out that such is a pretty weak argument if all we're doing is throwing chapter and verse about. However, historical Christian thinking on this is far deeper than just a few verses in Deuteronomy.
It's a fine thing to illustrate to Christians (many of whom are far too insular for their own good) that lgbt folks are real people and are their neighbors, and that Christians who look down on gays outside but wink at adulterers inside will have some answering to do. But that should not and will not change Christian teaching, because (contrary to some opinion) that teaching is not built upon ignorance or hate or any emotion, but upon a specific understanding of how the universe works. It may be correct or it may not, but most Christians don't believe homosexuality is wrong because they don't know any gays. They don't know any gays because they seldom venture outside the walls far enough to meet any.
mitzibel (Misty Nuckolls) says…
Bill---"play" the fundamentalist? Cool, then I get to "play" the foul-mouthed crazy lady!!!
ladylaw (Terry Bush) says…
At the risk of being wrong (something I am a lot) and/or having my attempts to share information taken as an attempt to preach or judge.
As I understand it, the Catholic church (can't speak for any others) teachs that being homosexual (or bi or transgendered or any other type of "leanings" or sexual urging) is not a sin.
Rather, I was taught that nothing we are is sinful - it is giving into the temptation to sin that results in a rift between ourselves and God. In other words, acting upon sinful urges (and there is a long list of things that are considered sinning, including killing other people, stealing, lying, pre-marital sex, and yes homosexual acts) that are regarded as sinning. While I do not have the urge to commit some of these sins, there are some areas of my life that are nothing but one tempation after another. We all have different crosses to bear.
However, despite years of being taught Catholic rules (being indoctrinated for those who despise my faith) I have never ever been taught to ostracize or condemn anyone for any sin. Rather, I was taught that judging the souls of others is for a job fit for God alone. I can try to help, in many ways, people who struggle with something that keeps them from being closer to God - just as others help me in that regard. The form that "help" may take varies - but I find prayer and kindness work best for me. But I think that I have no right(s) to condemn or look down upon anyone, for anything. "Those who are without sin, cast the first stone" and "Forgive us, as we forgive others." resonate for me.
The God I was brought up to believe in does not require that followers know everything or think they are superior to anyone. Rather - I was taught that we are all children of the same God, and thus all brothers and sisters. As for what that means, I was taught "Why were we created? To know, love and serve God, in this world and the next." Thus, I try to stick to that basic as a guide.
And for the record double dot tom, I think a lot of people know individuals who are homosexual in their orientation (or lbgt) - they just haven't figured it out yet b/c there's a lot of hiding and pretending that still goes on, for some fairly obvious reasons.
Wicholas (Wick Thomas) says…
We live in such a polarized society. I find that we often perpetuate that ourselves. This trip is in no means a way to force anyone to believe anything. We are presenting our ideas on theology, our experiences in life, and how this homophobic policy that is in place is effecting people. There is no forcing involved. Many of these students still think to be gay is a sin. As do many of these denominations. Please look up ex-gay therapy if you don't believe me. You are right, religious institutions are able to make their own rules, and I also know those rules change as Christian leaders come to understand their faith more fully.
Many of these institutions have had previous bans on women and people of color. I believe Bob Jones just started allowing interracial dating in 2000. That's not to say these struggles are identical. However, the Christian church in this country has changed it's mind over issues over time.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
Funny how none of the 'devil's advocates' are actually advocating for the devil.
Sorry about theshorthand thetomdotdot.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
I just want to say that this issue isn't about feelings. It is about human and civil rights, it is about equal access to society, wealth and government. More immediately, it is about basic safety.
Religious doctrines inform the way our civil justice system works, they inform civic leaders, they shape the hearts and minds of individuals. The fervent verbal attacks against gays in churches, on talk radio, in popular music and in our two party system's political posturing, along with unrealistic ideas of masculinity and feminity enforced by the main stream media and ideas about gender that exist in various racial, ethnic and economic sub-sets of our society are the stimuli for acts of violence, physical and otherwise against lgbtq people.
I don't have a solution to the problem. But I think that what Wick is doing is a wonderful way to begin a meaningful dialogue about how we can learn to live with each other, without harming each other, especially when we disagree nd people will always disagree about some thing.
Hate crimes against gender non-comforming people are second only to race-based hate crimes and it is a very close second. (Plus many gender-based hate crimes are not investigated or prosecuted appropriately.) There is group called GenderPAC that has issued a report entitled 50 under 30 which profiles 50 youths who have been murdered since 1995 because of their gender presentation, and outlines the nature of hate crimes against the lgbtq community and people who are percieved to be lgbtq.
GenderPAC's 50 under 30:
http://www.gpac.org/50under30
Also, for more about the euality ride check out: http://www.soulforce.org/equalityride
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Wick, Billy:
I've got a personal vendetta against polarization. It's one I've been carrying long before either of you were born, so take it for what it's worth.
Wick - you are on the bus, and you wrote a blog. Unfortunately, that puts you in my line of sight which in turn requires you to carry an extra burden. I expect more from you. I expect a higher degree of tolerance and compassion than that which you expect for your friends. Fair? No. The world does not change on fair.
Billy - your assumptions about me are strereotypical, but, granted, not wholly inexcusable. Being straight, white, and male doesn't make me some petty ass over-sensitive redneck that sees every story of violence against gays as an affront to his christianity. My petty over-sensitivity is hard won nurture not nature, thank you very much. Fact is I'm a Pragmatic Agnostic Humanist (PAH - a small (1) but elite group of waffling fence sitters with equal measures of love and disdain for all peoples unirregardless of race, greed, gender, etc.), who tends to be harder on people he agrees with than those he does not. I confess to a certain arrogance (especially annoying is my habit of saying "PAH" while others are trying to make a point), and I'm just arrogant enough to state that the only difference between me and most people is said confession.
And I hate - no HATE - propoganda with an unspeakable passion. So when I read about accusations of "spriritual violence" leveled against the christian community my propogadar starts spinning so hard it puts a twist in my neck.
Soulforce lost me in their mission statement when they equated christianity with westboro baptist "church".
Hate crimes are commited by haters. I would wager the totally unsubstantiatable claim that if you could measure the hearts of people across this country and could count those who would stand between you and someone who would commit violence against you for your gender expression, the greater number of those would be christians. I claim an alliance with those christians.
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Spelling, grammar (questionable use of parenthesis), and word creation. Shoot me.
El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) says…
I don't mean to pile on (and for that reason I wish someone else had commented after dots so this comment would not appear that way), but this statement from Wick is I think the perfect example of what the man is talking about: "I also know those rules change as Christian leaders come to understand their faith more fully."
It sounds, of course, so hopeful and liberal and open, but what it truly says, if one explores its assumptions and then takes it at face value, is that a hundred generations of Christians -- who have accumulated billions of hours in prayer and meditation and study -- do not understand their own beliefs. And yet somehow we do. We who don't even hold their faith* are somehow equipped to teach them its deepest secrets.
Billy said something interesting that I think bears exploration: "I don't believe in good and evil. I believe in justice and injustice...but I don't believe in opposites..."
What are justice and injustice if they are not opposites? And why should one prefer justice to injustice if one is not good and the other evil?
The crux of the problem is that either a preference for justice over injustice is like prefering chocolate over strawberry - a choice of mere personal preference - or it is a choice of what is good over what is evil.
If one truly does not believe in good and evil, then he should not be surprised if everyone else treats his words like those of an evangelist of chocolate. But if you are to truly convince another to step beyond the senses one must appeal to the transcendental. One must grab onto the moral, the good over the evil, and convince those who DO believe in such that not only is justice a transcendental good, but that the good is to be prefered over the evil and that the treatment you seek is in line with that.
lgbt folks like to compare their struggle to that of blacks in America, but if one goes back and reads the words of Frederick Douglass or MLK2, one will see them saturated in appeals to a standard of good and evil that all men accept - one that shames them, more often than not, into doing what they ought over what their passions direct.
The struggle for justice must always exist within the asssumption that justice is morally good and that the moral good is to be preferred over the moral evil. The personal preference can only be overriden with an appeal to the transcendental, to the universal, or else you are naught but an evangelist of flavor, and no one will ever convince one who prefers strawberry that chocolate is better if the appeal is limited to the sensual.
* and are quite often completely ignorant of it.
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Not piling on, I swear. Just clarifying. I got lost in my cleverness in my last comment. Sorry.
Wick - your words:
"The reason I feel sick, is that we live in a world, with all it's beauty, and that we are still able to do these things. We are able to destroy, deny, or degrade people because of who they are. We are willing to kill someone for who they love. Most of all I feel sick, because so few people are willing to do anything about it."
My words:
"Don't get rolled over by everyone else's hypocrisy. You might lose sight of your own. Courage is not courage if you just use it to enhance your victimhood."
If I misunderstand your words, there's naught to do about it. I'm too old to relearn the language and interpret things differently than I do. I'm just asking you to consider that there is a deeper level to your mission that the shallow rhetorical terrorism of soulforce may not account for. And do not aplogize to me. I'm on your side. Or I'm trying to be.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
Thetomdotdot - I wasn't trying to lump you into any categories, just reacting to what you wrote, I recognize that you are by neccessity an individual and I appreciate your feelings of uniqueness (it is one of the great things about being alive), but I think we can all agree that our individual perceptions of the world and access to social, political and economic structures are determined in large part to our social identities, ie the groups we percieve ourselves to belong to or others percieve us to be a part of.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
El_Borak - I understand your argument. It is highly reminiscent of Plato's Symposium, but I disagree with you, respectfully. I don't think justice and injustice are opposites, and I think good and bad are almost meaningless terms because they are so dependent upon context.
An example of justice, good, bad, etc.
If a man kills another man, most people would say that it is unjust and bad, perhaps even evil. But if a man kills another man to prevent him from killing a third man, then things become tricky, right. Is it okay to kill someone to prevent him from killing someone else? Is that just? Is it injust? What if a man kills another man to prevent him from killing a woman? A child? Is this different? Or to prevent him from killing multiple other men or women? I would argue that what is justice to some is injustice to others, but we can develop societal standards of justice that are context sensitive - ie justice in a social sense is applying rules universally to all people (all people can vote, all people can marry, all people can get health insurance for their families). Whether or not you think voting is 'good' or marriage is 'good' or partner benefits are 'good' I think we can agree that all people should have equal access to them. What is good to some is bad to others. This is why I avoid these terms. I would argue that there are some things that are likely absolutely wrong or 'bad', but it is a very small set of things. As Kwame Apiah said in his speech at KU, "I am pretty sure causing gratuitous pain to any living creature is wrong. It is one of the few things I am the most sure about."
I agree whole heartedly that there are major differences between the discrimmination gay people face and the discrimmination people of color face. However, I think that the institutions that oppress these two groups are often one in the same and frequently these institutions use race, class, gender and sexuality as ways of undermining the agency of individuals with minority identities.
I would like to say that the primary issue is not individuals who are hateful. It is structures that either purposefully or unintentionally oppress and marginalize people. I have no problem with people believing incorrect things about queers or christians or queer christians in theory, but in practice those beliefs inform the creation of socio-political-econonomic structures that oppress others. We have the great luxury of living in a civil society in which we have some say in our legal structure, the troubling thing is that frequently we rush to vote for policies or figure heads that espouse our own beliefs instead of ones that protect everyone's beliefs. I think that is the great challenge of our time: how do we make steps to secure the human rights of all people, including the right to disagree?
El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) says…
Billy: "I would argue that what is justice to some is injustice to others, but we can develop societal standards of justice that are context sensitive - ie justice in a social sense is applying rules universally to all people..."
And I don't want to go all Plato on you but I think in this case he's quite correct. If you argue that what is justice to A is injustice to B, if what is just is at the same time unjust, is justice not without meaning?
Now if we define "justice" as "applying rules universally to all people", fine, but I don't know of anyone who really believes that's what justice is, nor do I think we'll find anyone who would desire to do that society-wide. Should a 3-year-old serve jail time for shoplifting? Should a Brit in Britain vote for our President? I think you'll have a hard time finding someone who thinks it's just to punish a 3-year-old the same as an adult or to allow non-Americans to choose our leaders.
And yet as soon as we say, "well, that's different," then we have vetoed the idea of "applying rules universally to all people" and all we have left is a fight over what rules should be applied to what people. We can - and should - do so with justice as the goal, but to seek justice, justice must be something else entirely.
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
El_Borak: That is what I meant by context sensitive, it is by no means a simple idea and I know I did it an injustice (snicker) by trying to talk about it in a hurry on my morning break :-)
billy (Billy Keefe) says…
As for Brits voting for a US leader, I don't have too much trouble with that idea, so long as US folks can vote for British leaders . . . but then again I am a big fan of the No Borders Movement, so it is somewhat of a moot point.
I think punitive matters are a bag of worms that I would rather leave unopened at the moment. Too much other stuff to do today, but feel free to have at it yourself.