Suggested ground rules for CBF discussions
Submitted by Heather on August 28 1999 at 11:07:29
In reply to More waffling. Very Tiring. Submitted by Jimf3 on August 28 1999 at 00:45:34
|
I'm wondering if this would be a good opportunity to discuss what is or isn't acceptable behavior on this board. Myself, I'm not sure where to start, but I do note that two very different situations have caused trouble recently. One is Jesus Lover's post, directed specifically toward you, stating that you were imprisoned by Satan. The other was Jesus Lover's post, directed at no one in particular, stating that homosexual attraction comes from Satan. It seems me that Jesus Lover's first post – and any others of that sort – was outside the bounds of acceptable behavior, because it consisted of a very pointed judgment as to the relationship between a particular person and God, and I don't think that it is acceptable for CBF members to make that sort of public judgment. On the other hand, I'm finding it very difficult to see the other type of post as offensive. A number of people have said that they believe Jesus Lover's sentiments were wrong, but the post was not initially an attack on a particular individual; rather it was Jesus Lover's general statement of his views on this matter. Certainly whenever any CBF member makes a statement that others disagree with, anyone can and should speak up and voice his concerns. I note, for example, that Gerald of New Zealand has recently posted a message voicing his concern about posts by CBF members in which they say that they believed boylove sex is sinful, and likewise some CBF members in the past have spoken up and protested when others advocated boylove sex. If a member of the sexual recovery community were to come here and advocate that all boylovers enter into therapy, I think that we could expect a lively discussion, and likewise I think that we could expect a lively discussion if a boylove activist argued that all boylovers should be out campaigning for the right of boys to have sex with the partners of their choice. Amongst these many controversial topics, I think that we will continue to want to have serious, concerned discussions as to what attitude Christianity should take toward homosexuality and what actions the Church has taken in the past that may have violated Christian principles of unconditional love. What I think is unacceptable are two types of posts. One, as I have suggested, is a post in which a CBF member tells another member, whether Christian or nonChristian, what his relationship is with God. Even if the CBF member hopes thereby to help the other person, I think that this is a profoundly unChristian act. The other type of post that I think is unacceptable is one where someone interprets as a personal attack a post that is intended as a general statement. I've been restraining myself from saying this for some time, Jim, but I really don't think that you have the right to speak on behalf of all of us who have homosexual feelings. My "ancestors" as much as yours were among those who were burned by the Church, and my fellow bisexuals are among those who are affected by present-day Christian attitudes toward homosexuality. That is true of everyone on this board, and I'm finding your continued attempts to frame this discussion as an issue of Christians versus gays to be strongly disrespectful of the CBF members. Everyone here, to some degree or another, is aware of the effects of Christianity on the lives of same-gender-attracted people – we've all lived through this ourselves. To suggest that we haven't – to demand personal apologies for general posts about homosexuality, as though the posts were directed at you alone, or to make repeated remarks about the "loving, concerned Christians" here not caring about gays – is in effect to say that your experiences as a same-gender-attracted person count more than ours. So I'd like to suggest two ground rules for CBF: that no one participating here make pointed remarks about another person's relationship with God, and that no one participating here treat as a personal attack any post that is intended as a general statement. Within those parameters, I think that there is ample room for us to discuss general questions about the Church's attitude toward homosexuality, a discussion to which I'm sure that you and Jesus Lover will have valuable contributions to make. Heather |