Colleges 'coming out' for gays
Brittany Anas, Daily Camera
Published April 15, 2008 at 6:29 a.m.
Updated April 15, 2008 at 6:29 a.m.
As high-schoolers are "coming out" at younger ages, universities are doing more to market themselves to college-bound gay students.
The University of Colorado — which participates in about 65 national, springtime college-admissions fairs — included one for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students on this year's schedule.
Also, the Boulder campus' Gay-Straight Alliance is working with the student government to start a new program in which CU students would educate high-schoolers on issues surrounding sexuality and campus programs.
Shane Windmeyer, executive director of Campus Pride, a national nonprofit for GLBT students, said colleges are just now "coming out of the closet and being visible in the recruitment process."
Universities are realizing that having gay-friendly campuses is good for enrollment figures and building a diverse student population, he said.
"One of the things we have to recognize is students are coming out at younger ages while they are in high school," Windmeyer said. "Oftentimes they are discriminated against. When they go away to college, they don't want to have to deal with bias or bigoted attitudes. They just want to go and get an education like everyone else."
Windmeyer said an increasing media portrayal of the GLBT community, including popular television shows such as "Will & Grace," could be among the reasons young gay people are coming out at earlier ages.
CU's admissions office was alerted to a recent Campus Pride-organized college-admissions fair by a chancellor's committee that focuses on campus GLBT issues, said Admissions Director Kevin MacLennan. An admissions counselor attended the West Coast fair, which was last week in California.
"Any time we have talented students who want information about college and want to know about our great institution, I want to be there to talk about opportunities," MacLennan said.
University officials also say that students who may not be gay themselves research the tolerance of campuses.
Isabel Galupo, a high-schooler from Towson, Md., who is shopping for colleges, attended a December admissions fair that targeted GLBT students and said she appreciated it because she could ask candid, important questions about campus climate.
"This type of college fair was also very important for me, as I have two moms," she said. "I want to be at a college where I can feel comfortable about my family."
Stephanie Wilenchek, director of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Resource Center at CU, said the university wants to promote its programs and student groups to potential applicants. For example, students can earn a certificate — which is similar to a minor — in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender studies by passing about eight classes, or 24 credit hours, related to gay-studies topics.
About 10 classes every semester explore gay issues, including courses such as "Queer Ethnic Studies" and "Queer Literature and Criticism."
CU's Boulder campus received a "4" ranking on Campus Pride's index, with "5" being the highest score.
Wilenchek said she has seen a rise in gay-straight alliances in high schools over the past decade, which can lead to a more-accepting high school climate.
"I've seen more students coming to campus who are further along in the GLBT identity and feeling pride around their identity," she said.
Lacee Jauregui, a CU transfer student who heads CU's Gay-Straight Alliance and identifies herself as "queer," said knowing whether a campus is accepting is key in the search for a college.
"It's important that we advertise that we are a queer-friendly campus," she said. "This is something that's important. It's not the same as, 'I like the sun, so I'll go to school on the West Coast.' Or, 'I like the city, so I'll go to New York.' It's really about safety."
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Legislature Blog
Read live updates from the opening of the 2009 legislative session.
-
Rocky multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Who's next?
Complete coverage of the Broncos' search for a new coach.
-
Rocky year in photos
View an audio slide show of staff selections from 2008.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Two-man advantage with Avs
-
Shanahan's career
See photos from Mike Shanahan's career as Broncos coach.
-
12 days of Drew
Look back at the year that has been with Drew Litton.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
April 15, 2008
7:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
DeimosJB writes:
Jeuden_frei – your comments are not appropriate. Along the "two wrongs don't make a right" philosophy, there are very few things in this world that justify murder. Vigilante actions are not justice, and mock the beliefs which you probably hold. If you believe homosexuality is a sin, good for you, fight for your beliefs with all the political (support passage of laws), legal (ensure enforcement of existing laws), logical (point out the health and well-being issues that often suffer in homosexuals, as well as the research suggesting changes in brain patterns are the result, not cause, of homosexuality), religious (since most religions explicitly prohibit) and economic (put your money where your mouth is. Don't attend CU if you prefer. Don't contribute to CU) fervor you can muster; but in the meantime, let justice run its course – the true justice of the all-mighty, in which every choice must face a reckoning, not the self-enacted vigilante variety you’re advocating (whether in jest or seriousness).
April 15, 2008
7:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
Just what the hell are you people afraid of. Get a life.
April 15, 2008
8:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike_In_Hartsel writes:
How about the colleges promote a balanced higher education and quit attempting to be promotors of social engineering? Oh, I forgot. Silly me. Socialism is what our public universities are all about in today's world. Education comes last after their lengthy liberal agenda.
April 15, 2008
8:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gumby writes:
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.. all that stuff is important too. If students aren't comfortable at school because of people like our ever so clever friend jeuden_frei, that makes learning (not to mention paying an arm and a leg to do it) a lot more difficult. Since people insist upon persecuting people who aren't 100% like themselves in order to feel better about their own sad little lives, I just can't see trying to ensure that EVERYONE feels as comfortable and safe as possible, as social engineering.. but perhaps that's just me.
we hate most in others that which we see in ourselves.
April 15, 2008
8:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
DeimosJB writes:
Jeuden, Now you're talking. Don't forget to take a cab home from the bar though. Or you could let one of your sober "biddies" give you a ride home, but if your biddy hits on you...
April 15, 2008
8:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Poor jeuden_frei! He's so frightened that a gay man will "come on to him." I bet you're ALL MAN except for the fact that he's terrified of a GAY MAN who probably wouldn't give you the time of day anyway. ALSO, what kind of local bar are you hanging out at where a gay man could hit on you? Stay out of the gay bars and you'll be safe. What a tool.
April 15, 2008
9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
Now, jeuden frei. Don't get excited. I'm only stating that you are as dumb as a box of tools which your question clearly proves. You really seem to think a lot about having people "come on" to you. Methinks, the lady doth protest too much.
April 15, 2008
9:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
nobodyman writes:
This idea that gays go to bars and hit on rednecks is pretty hilarious. I don't think you have to worry about getting hit on unless you go to a gay bar. Wait, what were you doing there?
April 15, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
Weird. CU could have tried to appeal to prospective students by being a center of academic achievement. Instead it's decided that is too hard, and instead will try some marketing to special interest groups to boost it's sinking reputation.
Considering the track record of CU in hiring frauds as staffmembers, excusing the criminal activities of its students, and paying it's "professors" to protest parades instead of teaching, that may be the only approach it has left.
Besides, that whole "academic excellence" approach conflicts with the "political correctness" agenda.
And then they wonder why CU has become known as Crap U.
April 15, 2008
9:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gumby writes:
While those may indeed be problems with CU, the article states that this is becoming a common trend with Universities, simply focusing on CU as a local example, not that CU is unique in this particular "marketing" strategy of attempting to offer a safe learning environment for all. Gosh darn people trying to live up to some of the ideals of the constitution. Let's get 'em!
April 15, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
KalHali writes:
Who cares if some student organization, run by the students not the school, is having a social event? And who cares if these students are homosexuals? It doesn't matter, this is a non-issue. There are many student organizations at CU as well as other campuses that have other agendas, such as Christianity, animal rights, and others. As far as this being equated to socialism, people voicing their sexual orientation is a far cry from Mao's, "Red Book", or Lenin's, "Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism". People on this board need to get a life and stop worrying about things that don't matter.
April 15, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
IronmanCarmichael writes:
Whether "some dude hits on" jeuden_frei in a bar depends, I suppose, on how either how hot j_f is or how drunk the dude. (Incidentally, lots of straight men get drunk--or use drunkenness--as an excuse to have sex with other men, to see what it's like.)
I did, however, enjoy j_f's typo "get drunk with my biddies." Talk about Freudian slip. Most dedicated homophobes sound like frustrated old maids who peek in keyholes to make sure no hanky-panky is going on. It's not the fact of homosexuality that's got them so riled, it's their own subconscious curiosity.
April 15, 2008
9:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Jimminy writes:
But don't try to smoke on campus.
April 15, 2008
9:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
It appears that this is trend. University's making everyone feel "comfortable." I don't get it. When I was in school it was an atmosphere of competition more than political correctness. Oh, yeah, PC didn't exist (or wasn't referred to with the same nomenclature) in the early 70's. I was never made to feel welcome for any reason other than if I went to class, studied and didn't make too many waves, I'd get a degree.
CU and the regents have certainly made some very embarassing and incredibly foolish choices in the last 20 years for, supposedly, highly educated individuals. Perhaps the regents need to be of a more "common" nature. Like people who work for a living and make choices regarding new employees. This may be a better approach to higher education than to qualify graduates for nothing but the soft money job market. After all, just look at all those unresearched charicteristics of human nature that should be studied, discected and reported on so that we the people can be categorized, chastized, spindled, folded and mutilated to the point that we aren't "normal" anymore. Now that would be a real productive way to spend tax dollars, wouldn't it?
April 15, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Squatch writes:
HOW ABOUT JUST MARKETING YOUR COLLEGE TO KIDS THAT WANT AN EDUCATION.
April 15, 2008
10:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
psu96 writes:
Fly fish,
when you were in school Leave it to Beaver was a hit tv show, get over it... the family structure and the campuses have changed, it's called progress. Oh yeah Im getting drunk on Sundays.
April 15, 2008
10:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
Oh my goodness...colleges are now showing off their schools to not only people of color and women, but GAY PEOPLE!?!?!
THE HORROR!!!
wwfpd??
(what would fred phelps do?)
April 15, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
I have important things to say on this issue. Number one, you've got to admit, certain types of people contribute a lot to our musical theater performances. Number two, by 'embracing diversity' (i.e., experimenting) while still in the formative years, some may end up discovering their 'inner straightness' at an earlier age. Ann Heche is hot; Ellen DeG is not.
So that's all I have to say bout that.
April 15, 2008
11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gumby writes:
Lol, that's thrilling logic... what do you think of Ellen's new girlfriend, Portia De Rossi?
April 15, 2008
11:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Gumby, I admit I'm jealous of Ellen. I would hate her but she was soooo funny as that dizzy fish in Nemo, how can I?
titancain, I'm so tough I have iron poor blood - from sh*tting ball bearings.
April 15, 2008
12:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
kevinjjones writes:
Yet another reason not to fund or donate to CU. They aren't just indifferent to the moral development of their students, they actively sabotage it.
The acceptance of this self-destructive vice entails rejecting as bigots traditional Christians and other people with more-than-minimal standards of sexual ethics. Just like in George Norlin's day, consistent Catholics will be considered unfit to become college faculty.
Why didn't the Rocky get a quote from a critic of this policy? Are you seriously going to pretend it's not controversial?
April 15, 2008
12:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustMe writes:
^^
It's only controversial because closed-minds and ignorant people make it so. It should really be a non-issue. Homosexuality is a sin only in others' opinions - and your opinion on morality is not that of everyone else. What is wrong with two consenting adults being a loving relationship, be they gay or straight? Nothing.
Thankfully society is starting to understand this, in a few generations it will be as much a non-issue as interracial marriage is today.
If you don't like the policy - don't support CU - it's that simple, but I guarantee that more of these policies will be coming up - because as long as there are hateful people who will actively hurt and discriminate against someone simply because of how they are born, these policies are needed.
And times are a changing, homosexuals are now not more likely to be health risks, no more than a sorority girl or frat boy is. It all comes down to behaviors - and homosexuals are not rampant sex fiends as you fear-mongers would have people believe. They are smart, decent and hard-working members of society and should be treated as such.
April 15, 2008
12:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gumby writes:
So, you're suggesting (as a "Christian" I must infer, based on your comment) that the appropriate moral thing to do, is discriminate against anyone who is different than yourself?
April 15, 2008
12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
I have long suspected that the homosexual population is higher than what statisticians have said in the past. Now that children who are gay can express themselves at an earlier age, without fear from the straight community, we may be surprised at the number of gays in society.
All the silliness aside from men who worry about someone "hitting" on them, I mean should we women attack any man who hits on us? Say no thanks, and get over the fact that you attract gay men. What do you do if an ugly women hits on you, scream and cry for help from your biddies?
April 15, 2008
12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Shaupeen writes:
Remember: A new day presents a new opportunity to completely ignore NotChasB.
April 15, 2008
12:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
"The acceptance of this self-destructive vice entails rejecting as bigots traditional Christians and other people with more-than-minimal standards of sexual ethics."
traditional christians?
you mean, like christ? you know, the guy who preached love and acceptance of all people,... letting only god be the true decider of good and bad?
I'm a christian, bud, and you certainly don't represent any "tradition" I want to be a part of.
April 15, 2008
1:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Many of you have chosen to poke fun at the fact that one of our contributors accidently spelled 'biddies' when he meant to say 'buddies'. Perhaps your mockery is intended in good fun, but did it ever occur to any of you that perhaps this poster lost both of his hands while making a pipe bomb, and so now he has to type with his elbows?
WELL DID IT, YOU KEYBOARD DEXTERITY BIGOTS? FOR SHAME!
April 15, 2008
1:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustMe writes:
NotChasB - your comments are so ridiculous that I'm not even going to respond to them one by one.
If you can't see the logic of a two-consenting adults argument then clearly you don't understand logic at all - this issue is in no way the same as bestiality or pedophilia.
I'm sorry YOU see homosexuality as a perversion. It simply isn't - but as it's your opinion that it is - here's a suggestion - don't have sex with any homosexuals. It's that simple.
April 15, 2008
1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gumby writes:
But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust in his eye has already committed adultery with her in his heart. So if your eye – even if it is your good eye – causes you to lust, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your hand – even if it is your stronger hand – causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. Matthew 5:28-30
Gosh NotChasB, sexual immorality seems kinda wide open in the bible. Hope you've never found anyone attractive, or you'll be in hell with everyone else..bummer. (unless of course you've already gouged out your eyes, and are using a fancy braille keyboard)
April 15, 2008
1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustMe writes:
^^
Nope - but it's funny because God's truth is not the same across the board - oh you'll say it is, but it isn't. There is so much that is up for interpretation - and am I to assume that you don't eat shell fish? Or touch women, especially when they are unlcean, or sacrifice animals to please God? You say that folks can't pick and choose what to believe from the Bible - but homophobic people do it constantly.
Also - Christ never said homosexuals are dogs - in fact Jesus never mentioned homosexuality in the new testament at all. The few passages that pertain to sexuality in the new testament have been twisted - and are NOW said to be about homosexuality - but historically that is not accurate.
I'm not saying you should believe me over God - I'm not that presumptuous - you're going to believe what you're going to believe. I just find it sad.
April 15, 2008
1:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Shaupeen writes:
Once again, a new day (or obnoxious, homophobic, hate-filled post) presents a new opportunity to completely ignore NotChasB.
Do not give him what he craves--namely, making you furious by his narrow-minded posts. Ignore him. Do not respond. Consider it Zen training. If he fails to get anyone even to respond to him--to even slightly acknowledge his sad, little existence--maybe he'll take up a new hobby, like wandering into traffic.
April 15, 2008
1:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Gumby, the correct biblical interpretation of Matthew 5:28-30 is not that you can never find any non-spouse to be sexually attractive. However, if you do, you must ask the object of your unpure desires to punish you, or at the very least imagine him/her punishing you.
Seriously, I do believe there are good, compassionate, likable people who sincerely believe that homosexuality is a sin, or put another way, morally wrong. Some of them have been raised or taught this way, and some of them interestingly enough seem to be 'predisposed' to think/feel this way. Of course many of us disagree with them, but sometimes to me it seems like the homophobe-bashing goes a little overboard too. I guess there are always those that will stoke the flames...
April 15, 2008
2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gumby writes:
Davies, I certainly understand what your saying, however the "Interpretation" is not what's being discussed…when people introduce the bible to a conversation, they typically don't take the historical significance, the morals of the time, or any of the other important surrounding information into account, so I'll be happy to stick with the information as written, just as any number of zealots who choose to use the bible as "proof" of gods hatred of whoever it is they're arguing against :)
April 15, 2008
2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Homophobes confuse me. Setting aside the Bible and its hand full of anti gay passages, do homophobes think that everyone is born heterosexual?
Do they then think that some people choose sex acts with the same gender? Why? What is better about gay sex that makes it so attractive and keeps people in it for life? Do they think that if the "right" person of the same sex comes along, they too will change?
I must have posted these questions a dozen times and no answers, just more Bible quoting.
If people are born gay, that makes God/Goddess look sloppy, but then babies are born in all kind of conditions, from missing parts to having two faces. God apparently never makes a mistake, Christians tell us, yet we can see the differences in babies bodies every day on Google. However, the idea that God/Goddess makes gays and bisexuals is just too far out their for Christians to believe.
If God/Goddess can make a baby girl with two faces, why not a baby girl with two sexual attractions? Maybe God/Goddess likes diversity since that is where most of it comes from. Different at birth.
Hey Shaupeen, Charles the lessor is an object lesson in the lower than room temp i.q. in a supposedly function human.
April 15, 2008
2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reason writes:
While I certainly agree with your message of tolerance in a rapidly diversifying world me2, I always wonder why it is that when posters try and mock another poster's intelligence, they almost always seem to make errors(some sort of childish namecalling jinx?) "Charles the lessor is an object lesson in the lower than room temp i.q. in a supposedly function human." I'm guessing that you meant lesser and functional, respectively. Your willingness to engage in the type of debate that dominates elementary schoolyards across the world undermines the sort of message I think you were trying to make, the one about tolerance and respect for other's life choices. I guess when it comes to foolish people, it takes one to know one.
April 15, 2008
2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Shaupeen writes:
You are correct me2, not to mention a raging, closeted homosexual. It's a good thing he believes in Hell, so he can enjoy his hypocrisy forever.
April 15, 2008
2:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
I thought I cleared this up on another post. George Bush caused the two-faced baby girl. You will recall that a few years back the Union Carbide company had a large release of toxic gases from one of its chemical plants; I believe this was in Bhopal, India. One or both of the parents of the two-faced girl were obviously exposed to fumes from this toxic gas release. And no one has provided conclusive proof that Union Carbide did not contribute to W's campaign fund. There you go; Bush's fault again.
April 15, 2008
2:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
reason, after reading some of Charles the Lesser`s posts to me, and about me, I can call him anything I want and not live long enough to pay him back in kind. Errors notwithstanding, he really is not to bright.
Now, can anyone answer my questions about homosexuals?
April 15, 2008
3:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reason writes:
There is is again, the wannabe Mensa-ite jinx. I never said anything about whether or not you could believe in Hammurabi's code should you so desire, merely that tit-for-tat isn't usually a good way to make your case, nor to seem like a grown adult. It seems that maybe you're not *too* bright yourself, Sharon.
April 15, 2008
3:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
Why all the apologists for religious based bigotry? Can't we all just agree that it's a product of the worst kind of ignorance and move on?
yes, reason....i'm calling these bigots ignorant.
April 15, 2008
3:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustMe writes:
^^
But reason, I just noticed a typo in your post as well! Oh no!
I don't think an internet message board is a great indicator of intellect - especially if someone is impassioned about an issue - fingers fly without really spell or grammar checking. It happens.
That said, I do agree that one resorting to name-calling isn't very constructive. I, for one, do not want to stoop to ChasB's name-calling tactics - though believe me, I'd have a few choice names to throw out there. It doesn't do much for an argument or discussion though.
Now - as to the homosexuals question asked by me2. I can't answer from a homophobic point of view, since I am not. BUT I've heard many Christians say that gays are not born that way, that it's a trick of Satan. Seriously. Many believe it's a result of abuse or other (home) environmental issue. When I ask about friends I have who grew up in completely functional "normal" households with a mother and father - and are still gay - the naysayers are often speechless and refuse to believe that anyone is born gay.
April 15, 2008
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Justme, thank you for your comments. The very idea that God makes or lets some people be born gay is the point I am trying to make, to religious folks. Gays say they are born that way, and don`t need an abusive home or some awful trauma to account for their sexual orientation.
Reason, please stay out of the friendly little game between Notchasb and myself, in which, I refer to him as not to bright, while he calls me a vile, baby killing atheist and a liberal, degenerate socialist sinner. As you can see we try to keep this a light and breezy exchange.
So now we can blame another mythical creation, another invisible friend, Satan, for gays.
April 15, 2008
3:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
LoFat writes:
So what if they are gay? I care nothing for the fact that they are homosexual, heterosexual, Hispanic, African-American, Asian, Native American, or in my case hillbilly redneck. People are people and that is the end of that. Accept it!!
The colleges and universities in the United States would be far better off if they actually educated their students in their chosen fields instead of trying to balkanize this country and make good Socialist-Democrats out of everyone.
April 15, 2008
3:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
LoFat writes:
I also noticed all of the hate oozed out by all of you liberal free thinkers. Amazing!! Talk of intolerance and bigotry!!!
April 15, 2008
3:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
yes lofatty...i will fully admit to being intolerant of bigotry.
surely you're not saying you're tolerant of hate and bigotry are you?
April 15, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustMe writes:
That's right - I am intolerant toward those who wish to deny gay people equal rights, I am intolerant of those who use a peaceful and loving religion as a means of attacking and putting down others, I am intolerant of those who tell me that I am immoral or sinful based on their own interpretation of The Bible, yet know absolutely nothing about me or my "lifestyle, I am intolerant of those who don't see that we are all human beings first and foremost.
So yes, I guess I am intolerant. But I am not hateful, I would never tell another person they are going to hell (that is not my place), or that God hates them.
I believe that judgment is ultimately up to God and God alone. I am intolerant of those who preach hatred and try to hide it behind religion. If that makes me a bigot, then so be it.
April 15, 2008
4:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Charles-B, careful now, your ncb has a champion or two (to, too, twoo?).. Can`t be (bee, bea) on his case too much.
April 15, 2008
5:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
and why would you bring up a fairy tale to justify your bigotry, bigfoot?
April 15, 2008
5:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
And in Leviticus is the famous description of rabbits chewing their cuds. And all the other "Put them to death" passages. Wonderful book.
April 15, 2008
5:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustMe writes:
Homosexuality, in and of itself, is not a sin, nor does the Bible condemn people who are gay.
Certain homosexual acts (mainly dealing with temple prostitution) are condemned, but not gay people. In fact there are far more heterosexual acts condemned in the Bible. For instance, it is an abomination to have sex with a woman on her period.
Also - historical context is never taken into consideration from people who use Leviticus. Because if that were taken into consideration they'd have to admit that it is NOT referring to homosexuality as we know it today - and in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah it's not even really about homosexuality.
Of course that requires people to look outside of a narrow scope and realize that the Bible as we know it today is not the book that it once was...it's been edited and interpreted. But those who would use it to put others down don't see that.
April 15, 2008
5:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Sasquath, I would go out and get those gays, but I am busy every night at Red Lobster going after those shell fish eaters. And you say there is no cherry picking. From my experience with Christians they use the OT to justify homophobia, and ignore all the rest. Someone had a dream about this dietary stuff.
Man you can`t make this stuff up.
The Bible is not an inconvenient truth if it says the sun circles the Earth. Among many, many other mistakes in this not-so-good book.
April 15, 2008
7:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Someone actually makes ncb look good. Ncb only wants gays in jail on the old sodomy laws, others want them put to death. How Biblical.
April 15, 2008
7:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reason writes:
"But reason, I just noticed a typo in your post as well! Oh no!
I don't think an internet message board is a great indicator of intellect - especially if someone is impassioned about an issue - fingers fly without really spell or grammar checking. It happens."
Justme, you are correct that internet forums always have been and probably always will be filled with errors of language/typing, which are not an issue by themselves, I was simply trying to make the point that it is rather ridiculous to mock someone else's intelligence and then not proofread your own writing to ensure that simple typos are not present, especially when the site itself forces an editing step upon posters. I can't rememeber seeing a post belittling someone's g factor that didn't contain at least one error on this site, and that's something. Also, I'm not quite sure that typo is the right word for the mistakes Sharon made("e" being five keys away from "o", and not adding a suffix to "function"), these are errors that seem a bit more excessive than not pressing the right key. NCB manages to make about 10 posts per day which reveal the nature of his intellect, Sharon reveals herself to be on the same level of thought by engaging in "eye for an eye" mudslinging.
April 15, 2008
7:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Reason, if you wish, you may judge my intellect by my poor spelling or grammar, I however, judge the intellect of posters by their ideas. Yes I think ncb has a low i.q and little love of learning. I can`t do an eye for an eye with ncb, there are not enough eyes at my disposal.
I am glad to see a college acknowledging gays as a vibrant part of their community. I fully support the gay agenda, as expressed by my many gay friends, and I hope ncb and all those like him grow in some way as human beings.
Just what is a g factor?
April 16, 2008
3:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
kevinjjones writes:
"The very idea that God makes or lets some people be born gay is the point I am trying to make, to religious folks. Gays say they are born that way, and don`t need an abusive home or some awful trauma to account for their sexual orientation."
Gay people give different answers to the question of if they were born that way. At CU-Boulder, the idea that both heterosexuality and homosexuality are "socially constructed" is sometimes taught.
For instance, was either Richard the Lionheart or Oscar Wilde gay? Though both were known to have engaged in sodomy, the answer isn't clear, since "gay" has all sorts of connotations today that it did not have in their time. Indeed, the category "homosexual" didn't even exist until the 19th century.
As for why God would make someone "gay," wouldn't one have to ask the same question of why God would make someone with a natural tendency to alcoholism or sociopathy or suicide or pedophilia? We won't affirm any of those, even though there could be genetic factors at work.
Assuming there really are genetic or environmental factors at work in many people with same-sex attractions, that fact is independent of assessments of the morality of homosexual acts.