Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

How far should protests go?

Expand Messages
  • nojam75
    I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts about the recent and upcoming protests against anti-gay organizations. Mel White s Soulforce seems to be be
    Message 1 of 11 , Jun 16, 2002
      I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts about the recent and
      upcoming protests against anti-gay organizations. Mel White's
      Soulforce seems to be be specifically advocating civil disobedience
      such as the twelve protesters who were arrested trying to enter the
      SBC meeting.

      Maybe I'm just a wuss, but I think breaking into a private gathering
      brings embarassment and harm to the gay-rights cause. It's one thing
      to protest and demand representation at a public institution (such as
      a city hall, WTO, etc.), but disrupting a private gathering crosses
      the line to me. Sure the arrests made headlines, but I believe the
      action only re-affirmed to many Baptists that gays are selfish,
      disrespectful people. I'm not against protesting a private
      organization or gathering (such as sidewalk activities), but attempts
      to disrupt or prevent a private meeting runs too close to censorship
      and intimidation.

      And to clarify my earlier post, I'm concerned about what kind of
      response Love Welcomes All is organizing to Focus on the Family's
      Love Won Out ex-gay conference in Kansas City. Their site says they
      are organizing a "direct action" protest on the day of the
      conference. I'm not sure what is meant by "direct action".

      - Norm!

      (Soulforce Press Release: http://www.soulforce.org/stl_pr061102.html)
      (AP Article: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
      tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020611/ap_wo_en_po/us_southern_baptists_2)
      (http://www.lovewelcomesall.org)
    • Michael Airhart
      Norm, I m biased because I happen to volunteer at some Soulforce actions. From my perspective, Soulforce is advocating nonviolent civil disobedience, as well
      Message 2 of 11 , Jun 16, 2002
        Norm,

        I'm biased because I happen to volunteer at some Soulforce actions.

        From my perspective, Soulforce is advocating nonviolent civil
        disobedience, as well as lesser forms of dissent such as prayer vigils
        and sidewalk pickets, when anti-gay churches refuse to dialogue after
        they have explicitly promoted violence, discrimination and harassment
        against gays.

        Alabama's Southern Baptist Chief Justice Moore stated in a legal opinion
        in February that "the state must use...confinement and even execution"
        to prevent gays and lesbians from influencing children. Outgoing SBC
        president James Merritt refused to denounce Moore's statement.

        So six male-female, impeccably dressed pairs of Soulforce participants
        -- including a heterosexual minister, a heterosexual mom, a grandmother,
        and a 70-year-old man -- attended the convention. At periodic intervals,
        one of the pairs would stand up during Merritt's speech, demand that he
        meet with gay people of faith, tell him to stop spiritual violence, and
        say that God loves his gay children. For that, each pair was arrested.
        The SBC sought to charge them with felony "ethnic intimidation" -- hate
        crimes, in Missourispeak. The police were incredulous at the SBC's
        charges, and the felony charges were later dropped.

        Outside the convention, another 38 Soulforce participants were arrested
        when they attempted to walk in.

        As I understand the situation, in five days of SBC meetings, only one
        man's speech was interrupted. This was Merritt, who in addition to
        threatening gays, spent his presidency demoting and ostracizing the
        denomination's women from all leadership positions while issuing regular
        tirades against Jews, Muslims, and social justice workers. In recent
        years, Merritt and the conservative flank have sought to ostracize
        thousands of SBC churches for their positive attitudes toward women and
        their independent interpretation of the Bible. I think these churches
        (as well as Jews and Muslims) will sympathize with Soulforce and others
        who publicly resist the tyranny.

        I don't think that it embarrasses us to confront SBC attendees with the
        fact that gays are people of faith, too, and that the SBC's violence
        against gays is unacceptable. In fact, I think it's embarrassing when we
        *don't* resist the tyranny.

        Would dialogue and town meetings be preferable? Absolutely. But ordinary
        pickets have failed to achieve that goal. Yet nobody enjoys getting
        arrested. If you can suggest effective, alternative ways of achieving
        public dialogue with the SBC, please by all means do so.

        Personally, I don't think that Soulforce's tactics will ever cause the
        SBC to meet with Soulforce directly, but such tactics may eventually
        compel the SBC to meet with discreet gay Baptists who emerge as an
        alternative.

        In the meantime, through the media, Soulforce has reminded the world
        that there are lots of people of faith out there, including Baptists,
        who won't stand by in silence when the SBC dictates that gays shall die
        by imprisonment, execution, and suicide.

        </getting off my soapbox>

        -- Mike :-)

        P.S. I wish we had more information about Love Welcomes All's protest. I
        have questions of my own: Will the action be nonviolent? Will the
        protest refute Dobson's message, or just draw unnecessary attention to a
        crackpot?
      • nojam75
        Thank you for the clarification regarding about the SBC protesters. What isn t clear to me is whether the twelve protesters inside the convention were
        Message 3 of 11 , Jun 17, 2002
          Thank you for the clarification regarding about the SBC protesters.
          What isn't clear to me is whether the twelve protesters inside the
          convention were authorized SBC members or attendees. I have no
          problem with members of an organization protesting within the
          organization they belong.

          However, the Soulforce news release characterized their action as
          an 'infiltration' which suggests that the protesters were non-SBC
          members. In such cases, I would still have a problem with their
          disruption. I don't see how such infiltrations or disruptions of a
          private gathering are any better than anti-gay forces attacking pro-
          gay gatherings. Sure it is frustrating when an organization refuses
          to engage in a public dialogue, but that is no excuse to violate
          their right to gather in private.

          I cannot suggest any guaranteed method to force a group to publically
          dialogue on an issue. The fact that a private group doesn't want to
          publically address an issue does entitle others to attack that
          group.

          Frankly, I think the SBC is a lost cause on the gay issue. Of
          course, I could be wrong. Afterall, it only took over 150 years for
          SBC to denounce slavery.

          Alabama Chief Justice Moore and the SBC certainly advocate anti-gay
          views, but I can't find any specific comments about imprisoning or
          executing gays. Justice Moore claims his comments were a
          characterization of the state's general authority to enforce laws --
          not specifically against gays. These groups have made plenty of anti-
          gay comments that there should be no need to exaggerate their
          comments.

          - Norm!

          (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/news/stories/4657newsstorypage.html)
          (http://www.hrc.org/newsreleases/2002/020219justice.asp)


          --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Michael Airhart" <mike@m...> wrote:
          > Norm,
          >
          > I'm biased because I happen to volunteer at some Soulforce actions.
          >
          > From my perspective, Soulforce is advocating nonviolent civil
          > disobedience, as well as lesser forms of dissent such as prayer
          vigils
          > and sidewalk pickets, when anti-gay churches refuse to dialogue
          after
          > they have explicitly promoted violence, discrimination and
          harassment
          > against gays.
          >
          > Alabama's Southern Baptist Chief Justice Moore stated in a legal
          opinion
          > in February that "the state must use...confinement and even
          execution"
          > to prevent gays and lesbians from influencing children. Outgoing SBC
          > president James Merritt refused to denounce Moore's statement.
          >
          > So six male-female, impeccably dressed pairs of Soulforce
          participants
          > -- including a heterosexual minister, a heterosexual mom, a
          grandmother,
          > and a 70-year-old man -- attended the convention. At periodic
          intervals,
          > one of the pairs would stand up during Merritt's speech, demand
          that he
          > meet with gay people of faith, tell him to stop spiritual violence,
          and
          > say that God loves his gay children. For that, each pair was
          arrested.
          > The SBC sought to charge them with felony "ethnic intimidation" --
          hate
          > crimes, in Missourispeak. The police were incredulous at the SBC's
          > charges, and the felony charges were later dropped.
          >
          > Outside the convention, another 38 Soulforce participants were
          arrested
          > when they attempted to walk in.
          >
          > As I understand the situation, in five days of SBC meetings, only
          one
          > man's speech was interrupted. This was Merritt, who in addition to
          > threatening gays, spent his presidency demoting and ostracizing the
          > denomination's women from all leadership positions while issuing
          regular
          > tirades against Jews, Muslims, and social justice workers. In recent
          > years, Merritt and the conservative flank have sought to ostracize
          > thousands of SBC churches for their positive attitudes toward women
          and
          > their independent interpretation of the Bible. I think these
          churches
          > (as well as Jews and Muslims) will sympathize with Soulforce and
          others
          > who publicly resist the tyranny.
          >
          > I don't think that it embarrasses us to confront SBC attendees with
          the
          > fact that gays are people of faith, too, and that the SBC's violence
          > against gays is unacceptable. In fact, I think it's embarrassing
          when we
          > *don't* resist the tyranny.
          >
          > Would dialogue and town meetings be preferable? Absolutely. But
          ordinary
          > pickets have failed to achieve that goal. Yet nobody enjoys getting
          > arrested. If you can suggest effective, alternative ways of
          achieving
          > public dialogue with the SBC, please by all means do so.
          >
          > Personally, I don't think that Soulforce's tactics will ever cause
          the
          > SBC to meet with Soulforce directly, but such tactics may eventually
          > compel the SBC to meet with discreet gay Baptists who emerge as an
          > alternative.
          >
          > In the meantime, through the media, Soulforce has reminded the world
          > that there are lots of people of faith out there, including
          Baptists,
          > who won't stand by in silence when the SBC dictates that gays shall
          die
          > by imprisonment, execution, and suicide.
          >
          > </getting off my soapbox>
          >
          > -- Mike :-)
          >
          > P.S. I wish we had more information about Love Welcomes All's
          protest. I
          > have questions of my own: Will the action be nonviolent? Will the
          > protest refute Dobson's message, or just draw unnecessary attention
          to a
          > crackpot?
        • BearJER@juno.com
          Mike, can you offer some proof that Alabama Chief Justice Moore said, the state must use...confinement and even execution and specifically what was the
          Message 4 of 11 , Jun 17, 2002
            Mike, can you offer some proof that Alabama Chief Justice Moore said,
            "the state must use...confinement and even execution" and specifically
            what was the context?

            Thanks, --Jerry

            PS--I attended an ex-gay conference in Michigan a couple years ago
            sponsored by Michigan Family Forum. At that conference, the leadership
            of the ex-gay ministries wanted to reach out and dialog with the
            protesters, but the police would not allow it.

            On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:57:24 -0400 "Michael Airhart"
            <mike@...> writes:
            > Norm,
            >
            > I'm biased because I happen to volunteer at some Soulforce actions.
            >
            > From my perspective, Soulforce is advocating nonviolent civil
            > disobedience, as well as lesser forms of dissent such as prayer
            > vigils
            > and sidewalk pickets, when anti-gay churches refuse to dialogue
            > after
            > they have explicitly promoted violence, discrimination and
            > harassment
            > against gays.
            >
            > Alabama's Southern Baptist Chief Justice Moore stated in a legal
            > opinion
            > in February that "the state must use...confinement and even
            > execution"
            > to prevent gays and lesbians from influencing children. Outgoing
            > SBC
            > president James Merritt refused to denounce Moore's statement.
            >
            > So six male-female, impeccably dressed pairs of Soulforce
            > participants
            > -- including a heterosexual minister, a heterosexual mom, a
            > grandmother,
            > and a 70-year-old man -- attended the convention. At periodic
            > intervals,
            > one of the pairs would stand up during Merritt's speech, demand that
            > he
            > meet with gay people of faith, tell him to stop spiritual violence,
            > and
            > say that God loves his gay children. For that, each pair was
            > arrested.
            > The SBC sought to charge them with felony "ethnic intimidation" --
            > hate
            > crimes, in Missourispeak. The police were incredulous at the SBC's
            > charges, and the felony charges were later dropped.
            >
            > Outside the convention, another 38 Soulforce participants were
            > arrested
            > when they attempted to walk in.
            >
            > As I understand the situation, in five days of SBC meetings, only
            > one
            > man's speech was interrupted. This was Merritt, who in addition to
            > threatening gays, spent his presidency demoting and ostracizing the
            > denomination's women from all leadership positions while issuing
            > regular
            > tirades against Jews, Muslims, and social justice workers. In
            > recent
            > years, Merritt and the conservative flank have sought to ostracize
            > thousands of SBC churches for their positive attitudes toward women
            > and
            > their independent interpretation of the Bible. I think these
            > churches
            > (as well as Jews and Muslims) will sympathize with Soulforce and
            > others
            > who publicly resist the tyranny.
            >
            > I don't think that it embarrasses us to confront SBC attendees with
            > the
            > fact that gays are people of faith, too, and that the SBC's
            > violence
            > against gays is unacceptable. In fact, I think it's embarrassing
            > when we
            > *don't* resist the tyranny.
            >
            > Would dialogue and town meetings be preferable? Absolutely. But
            > ordinary
            > pickets have failed to achieve that goal. Yet nobody enjoys getting
            > arrested. If you can suggest effective, alternative ways of
            > achieving
            > public dialogue with the SBC, please by all means do so.
            >
            > Personally, I don't think that Soulforce's tactics will ever cause
            > the
            > SBC to meet with Soulforce directly, but such tactics may
            > eventually
            > compel the SBC to meet with discreet gay Baptists who emerge as an
            > alternative.
            >
            > In the meantime, through the media, Soulforce has reminded the
            > world
            > that there are lots of people of faith out there, including
            > Baptists,
            > who won't stand by in silence when the SBC dictates that gays shall
            > die
            > by imprisonment, execution, and suicide.
            >
            > </getting off my soapbox>
            >
            > -- Mike :-)
            >
            > P.S. I wish we had more information about Love Welcomes All's
            > protest. I
            > have questions of my own: Will the action be nonviolent? Will the
            > protest refute Dobson's message, or just draw unnecessary attention
            > to a
            > crackpot?
            >
            >
            > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
            >

            ________________________________________________________________
            GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
            Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
            Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
            http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
          • BearJER@juno.com
            Guys, do you think it is possible to organize a very organized debate between ex-gay ministries and ex-ex-gays. The kind that would insist on order and
            Message 5 of 11 , Jun 17, 2002
              Guys, do you think it is possible to organize a very organized debate
              between ex-gay ministries and ex-ex-gays. The kind that would insist on
              order and letting everyone have their say in a respectful way?

              Jerry

              On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 22:18:54 -0000 "nojam75" <nojam75@...> writes:
              > Thank you for the clarification regarding about the SBC protesters.
              >
              > What isn't clear to me is whether the twelve protesters inside the
              > convention were authorized SBC members or attendees. I have no
              > problem with members of an organization protesting within the
              > organization they belong.
              >
              > However, the Soulforce news release characterized their action as
              > an 'infiltration' which suggests that the protesters were non-SBC
              > members. In such cases, I would still have a problem with their
              > disruption. I don't see how such infiltrations or disruptions of a
              >
              > private gathering are any better than anti-gay forces attacking
              > pro-
              > gay gatherings. Sure it is frustrating when an organization refuses
              >
              > to engage in a public dialogue, but that is no excuse to violate
              > their right to gather in private.
              >
              > I cannot suggest any guaranteed method to force a group to
              > publically
              > dialogue on an issue. The fact that a private group doesn't want to
              >
              > publically address an issue does entitle others to attack that
              > group.
              >
              > Frankly, I think the SBC is a lost cause on the gay issue. Of
              > course, I could be wrong. Afterall, it only took over 150 years for
              >
              > SBC to denounce slavery.
              >
              > Alabama Chief Justice Moore and the SBC certainly advocate anti-gay
              >
              > views, but I can't find any specific comments about imprisoning or
              > executing gays. Justice Moore claims his comments were a
              > characterization of the state's general authority to enforce laws --
              >
              > not specifically against gays. These groups have made plenty of
              > anti-
              > gay comments that there should be no need to exaggerate their
              > comments.
              >
              > - Norm!
              >
              > (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/news/stories/4657newsstorypage.html)
              > (http://www.hrc.org/newsreleases/2002/020219justice.asp)
              >
              >
              > --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Michael Airhart" <mike@m...> wrote:
              > > Norm,
              > >
              > > I'm biased because I happen to volunteer at some Soulforce
              > actions.
              > >
              > > From my perspective, Soulforce is advocating nonviolent civil
              > > disobedience, as well as lesser forms of dissent such as prayer
              > vigils
              > > and sidewalk pickets, when anti-gay churches refuse to dialogue
              > after
              > > they have explicitly promoted violence, discrimination and
              > harassment
              > > against gays.
              > >
              > > Alabama's Southern Baptist Chief Justice Moore stated in a legal
              > opinion
              > > in February that "the state must use...confinement and even
              > execution"
              > > to prevent gays and lesbians from influencing children. Outgoing
              > SBC
              > > president James Merritt refused to denounce Moore's statement.
              > >
              > > So six male-female, impeccably dressed pairs of Soulforce
              > participants
              > > -- including a heterosexual minister, a heterosexual mom, a
              > grandmother,
              > > and a 70-year-old man -- attended the convention. At periodic
              > intervals,
              > > one of the pairs would stand up during Merritt's speech, demand
              > that he
              > > meet with gay people of faith, tell him to stop spiritual
              > violence,
              > and
              > > say that God loves his gay children. For that, each pair was
              > arrested.
              > > The SBC sought to charge them with felony "ethnic intimidation" --
              >
              > hate
              > > crimes, in Missourispeak. The police were incredulous at the
              > SBC's
              > > charges, and the felony charges were later dropped.
              > >
              > > Outside the convention, another 38 Soulforce participants were
              > arrested
              > > when they attempted to walk in.
              > >
              > > As I understand the situation, in five days of SBC meetings, only
              >
              > one
              > > man's speech was interrupted. This was Merritt, who in addition
              > to
              > > threatening gays, spent his presidency demoting and ostracizing
              > the
              > > denomination's women from all leadership positions while issuing
              > regular
              > > tirades against Jews, Muslims, and social justice workers. In
              > recent
              > > years, Merritt and the conservative flank have sought to
              > ostracize
              > > thousands of SBC churches for their positive attitudes toward
              > women
              > and
              > > their independent interpretation of the Bible. I think these
              > churches
              > > (as well as Jews and Muslims) will sympathize with Soulforce and
              > others
              > > who publicly resist the tyranny.
              > >
              > > I don't think that it embarrasses us to confront SBC attendees
              > with
              > the
              > > fact that gays are people of faith, too, and that the SBC's
              > violence
              > > against gays is unacceptable. In fact, I think it's embarrassing
              > when we
              > > *don't* resist the tyranny.
              > >
              > > Would dialogue and town meetings be preferable? Absolutely. But
              > ordinary
              > > pickets have failed to achieve that goal. Yet nobody enjoys
              > getting
              > > arrested. If you can suggest effective, alternative ways of
              > achieving
              > > public dialogue with the SBC, please by all means do so.
              > >
              > > Personally, I don't think that Soulforce's tactics will ever cause
              >
              > the
              > > SBC to meet with Soulforce directly, but such tactics may
              > eventually
              > > compel the SBC to meet with discreet gay Baptists who emerge as
              > an
              > > alternative.
              > >
              > > In the meantime, through the media, Soulforce has reminded the
              > world
              > > that there are lots of people of faith out there, including
              > Baptists,
              > > who won't stand by in silence when the SBC dictates that gays
              > shall
              > die
              > > by imprisonment, execution, and suicide.
              > >
              > > </getting off my soapbox>
              > >
              > > -- Mike :-)
              > >
              > > P.S. I wish we had more information about Love Welcomes All's
              > protest. I
              > > have questions of my own: Will the action be nonviolent? Will the
              > > protest refute Dobson's message, or just draw unnecessary
              > attention
              > to a
              > > crackpot?
              >
              >
              > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >

              ________________________________________________________________
              GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
              Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
              Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
              http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
            • David
              Hi, I ve included the link in case you want to read the whole nauseating opinion. Strange but typical how the fundies thought that the uproar was over the
              Message 6 of 11 , Jun 17, 2002
                Hi, I've included the link in case you want to read the whole
                nauseating opinion. Strange but typical how the fundies thought that
                the uproar was over the decision itself when it was the commentary he
                added to it that was so offensive. BTW, your other post about asking
                about a controlled debate between ex-gays and dos equus is
                interesting in theory but in most such discussions emotions tend to
                run quite high in my experience. Then again maybe that's only the
                ones I'm involved in. :) Dave

                "The State may not interfere with the internal governing, structure,
                and maintenance of the family, but the protection of the family is a
                responsibility of the State. Custody disputes involve decision-making
                by the State, within the limits of its sphere of authority, in a way
                that preserves the fundamental family structure. The State carries
                the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct with
                physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It must
                use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this
                lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle."

                http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=al&vol=1002045&invol=2




                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
                http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
              • Michael Airhart
                Jerry, Good question -- I ll ask around for the full quotation and context. At a Soulforce event in D.C. a couple years ago, some of us tried to reach out to
                Message 7 of 11 , Jun 17, 2002
                  Jerry,

                  Good question -- I'll ask around for the full quotation and context.

                  At a Soulforce event in D.C. a couple years ago, some of us tried to
                  reach out to Anthony Falzarano (famous ex-gay) but the police and
                  protest organizers stopped that too. They didn't want any chance of a
                  nasty confrontation. Mind you, this was a nice retired woman leading the
                  bridging, and some of us already knew Anthony. So I was saddened that
                  the bridging effort was blocked. After all, the whole point of the
                  protest was to ask Catholic officials to meet with us.

                  -- Mike

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: BearJER@... [mailto:BearJER@...]
                  Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 11:39 PM
                  To: exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [ExExGayMinistry] How far should protests go?


                  Mike, can you offer some proof that Alabama Chief Justice Moore said,
                  "the state must use...confinement and even execution" and specifically
                  what was the context?

                  Thanks, --Jerry

                  PS--I attended an ex-gay conference in Michigan a couple years ago
                  sponsored by Michigan Family Forum. At that conference, the leadership
                  of the ex-gay ministries wanted to reach out and dialog with the
                  protesters, but the police would not allow it.
                • calldon2k
                  ... gathering ... thing ... as ... attempts ... censorship ... I agree entirely. I also know that the protest accomplished NOTHING positive. I have attended
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jun 19, 2002
                    --- In exexgayministry@y..., "nojam75" <nojam75@y...> wrote:
                    > Maybe I'm just a wuss, but I think breaking into a private
                    gathering
                    > brings embarassment and harm to the gay-rights cause. It's one
                    thing
                    > to protest and demand representation at a public institution (such
                    as
                    > a city hall, WTO, etc.), but disrupting a private gathering crosses
                    > the line to me. Sure the arrests made headlines, but I believe the
                    > action only re-affirmed to many Baptists that gays are selfish,
                    > disrespectful people. I'm not against protesting a private
                    > organization or gathering (such as sidewalk activities), but
                    attempts
                    > to disrupt or prevent a private meeting runs too close to
                    censorship
                    > and intimidation.

                    I agree entirely. I also know that the protest accomplished NOTHING
                    positive. I have attended a couple of SBC Conventions and
                    participated to a degree. I have also been working in other cities
                    when the Convention was being held in those cities. I have been
                    involved in it and also observed it as an "outsider." The mindset of
                    the people who attend the SBConvention is already settled in
                    concrete. Those folks aren't there to think. No amount of "protest"
                    will change even a single mind there.

                    As much as they may speak of such things as "freedom in Christ," SBC
                    folk do all they can to maintain their image during that week and to
                    maintain the status quo. Independant thought is NOT allowed! (I
                    guess THAT is why I never served an SBC church full-time.)

                    The SBC is like any other major political convention...it is
                    basically a time where we all just stand around, slapping each other
                    on the back and saying "Ain't it good that WE are right and THEY are
                    wrong?!? Ain't we good folks!!! Ain't it good that GOD is on OUR
                    side!"

                    The Baptists say it, the conservative Methodists say it, the liberal
                    Methodists say it, the Democrats say it, the Republicans say it, the
                    Catholics say it...etc., etc., etc.

                    Knowing the mindset of those who attend the SBC convention, nothing
                    positive was accomplished by that "protest."

                    ======
                    =====
                    ====
                    ===
                    ==
                    =
                  • Mike Airhart
                    So much for cursing the darkness, folks. Do any of you have constructive ideas on how to change the SBC mindset, or at least to discourage the public from
                    Message 9 of 11 , Jun 19, 2002
                      So much for cursing the darkness, folks.

                      Do any of you have constructive ideas on how to change the SBC mindset, or
                      at least to discourage the public from supporting the SBC political and
                      fundraising agenda?

                      Or are we just going to mope about them?

                      -- Mike
                    • BearJER@juno.com
                      Thanks, Dave, for the link. Wow, I m sorry -- I really didn t believe he said that about execution, but I see he did. That is absolutely detestable and
                      Message 10 of 11 , Jun 19, 2002
                        Thanks, Dave, for the link. Wow, I'm sorry -- I really didn't believe he
                        said that about execution, but I see he did. That is absolutely
                        detestable and certainly un-Christian, what he said. I was one of those
                        who championed his insistence in keeping the Ten Commandments in his
                        court room, but now I see that he is a legalist in the worst sense of the
                        word and doesn't understand God's grace at all apparently! Why do
                        Christians seemingly get a crackpot in their corner on the Ten
                        Commandments issue? Thanks for letting me know. I downloaded the whole
                        opinion so I can read through it, but what I saw was your paragraph and
                        then some and it was disgusting for a Christian to say that. That's old
                        covenant stuff, not the new convenant Jesus taught.

                        Jerry

                        On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 21:55:59 -0700 (PDT) David <dapapabear2@...>
                        writes:
                        > Hi, I've included the link in case you want to read the whole
                        > nauseating opinion. Strange but typical how the fundies thought
                        > that
                        > the uproar was over the decision itself when it was the commentary
                        > he
                        > added to it that was so offensive. BTW, your other post about
                        > asking
                        > about a controlled debate between ex-gays and dos equus is
                        > interesting in theory but in most such discussions emotions tend to
                        > run quite high in my experience. Then again maybe that's only the
                        > ones I'm involved in. :) Dave
                        >
                        > "The State may not interfere with the internal governing,
                        > structure,
                        > and maintenance of the family, but the protection of the family is
                        > a
                        > responsibility of the State. Custody disputes involve
                        > decision-making
                        > by the State, within the limits of its sphere of authority, in a
                        > way
                        > that preserves the fundamental family structure. The State carries
                        > the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct with
                        > physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It must
                        > use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this
                        > lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle."
                        >
                        >
                        http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=al&vol=1002045&inv
                        ol=2
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > __________________________________________________
                        > Do You Yahoo!?
                        > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
                        > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
                        >
                        > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                        >
                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > exexgayministry-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >
                        >

                        ________________________________________________________________
                        GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
                        Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
                        Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
                        http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
                      • nojam75
                        ... mindset, or ... and ... There is no way we can force a change of mindset . People will believe what they want to believe. However, we can use one of
                        Message 11 of 11 , Jun 19, 2002
                          --- In exexgayministry@y..., "Mike Airhart" <mairhart@i...> wrote:
                          > So much for cursing the darkness, folks.
                          >
                          > Do any of you have constructive ideas on how to change the SBC
                          mindset, or
                          > at least to discourage the public from supporting the SBC political
                          and
                          > fundraising agenda?

                          There is no way we can force a 'change of mindset'. People will
                          believe what they want to believe.

                          However, we can use one of their own tactics and boycott their
                          businesses such as the Yahoo! Groups advertiser Lifewaystores.com .

                          - Norm!
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.