It’s actually more of a glorified letter to the editor, and to be fair, I found it perfectly well written and articulately expressive, but it had nothing to do with gay, ex-gay, homoSEXual, or even the “culture war” --which is what I was expecting.
Fortunately though, it wasn’t until I was nearly through carefully-reading the brief article that I realized this. At which point I noticed that there were some thirty-odd comments to the story, which immediately drew my curiosity.
First, it’s a story in itself that he’s not making the "evil gay agenda" a story. A modest one, but a story. But that’s not the story.
Second, I don’t normally go the gratuitous route when it comes to picking on my anti-gay nemeses, such as when it comes to mithpellings, not the goodest of grammar, or any other host of easily make-funable-of.. ... ..things.
However, these comments are too profoundly entertaining not to share.
To get the full impact, click over and read the whole thing with the comments. It’s worth it.
For the lazy version:
An excerpt of the article itself, by Alan Chambers:
I drive an old Mercedes and have to use premium gas. At $4.23 a gallon (just filled up Monday), a tank is approaching $100 for me. The mornings have been overcast and seemingly cooler, so I decided to lose the air conditioner, opting for the fresh air that comes from rolling the windows down.
[short story shorter…]
So, I'm frustrated. Mad even. We are getting savaged at the pump and attempting to save a few dollars by putting the windows down while driving, which means breathing hazardous fumes and risking your health and the health of anyone riding with you.
And now a sampling of some of the merciless comments that followed (keeping in mind (at least as of this posting) none of which contain any mention of Chambers’ affiliation with Exodus):
(P.S. I don't think I've ever even seen this much anger directed toward him over at Ex-Gay Watch!)
-If I had this mans problems I believe I would stay at home and call my mama.
-Good god, what a drama queen this man is! His very -life- is in danger?
-Put this guy out of his misery! How would you like to have to work and live around this guy?
-my grandkids whine less than this guy.
-Where do you think your cars A/C gets its air from ya ****!
-I'm sure smoke from a cig inside another car was so overwhelming you nearly fainted…Are you the kind of guy that jogs behind a bus and gripes about the guy you ran past because he was smoking? What a sensitive fellow you are. It is obvious you will never get your nose in a real sweet spot. What a panzy.
-And here I thought it was going to be a legitimate opinion regarding the life or death choice to bike to work (on our dangerous and unfriendly roads)as so many news articles have advised, in order to save on gas.
...Go away, and don't come back until this wussy has seen his last sterile day...
-This guy is a nothing but a baby who need to be out of his misery!
-This guy whines like my 7 yr old niece.
-this guys car puts out more pollution than 50 smokers and he is complaining
-My God, how did I ever survive as a child? My dads car had 4/40 AC, no seat belts, a steel dash board, and he smoked a cigar.
-Agreed - I too thought it was about alternative transportation. After listening to all this whining I think I will slit my wrists.
-Oh my goodness! Your Mercedes hangs around your neck like an anchor now that premium gas is so expensive? […] In short, I believe you to be the shining example of the continued softening and "whimpification" of our society. Cowboy up, softie!
-Here's a thought for this JERK...TOUGH! Other people have rights just like you! You can complain when they jump in your mercedes and light up...until then…
-I save gas by riding my bicycle to work along side of everything this whiney beotch was nearly killed by.
-Know what the differrence is between a Mercedes and a porcupine???
A porcupine has the pr i c k s on the outside.
-Wow. No, I mean, WOW. What a Mo!! Here's a thought. Get off your fat **** and walk or bike to work.
Shifting gears now..
So this is what comes to mind for me. Depending on which version of the Bible you use, one of the verses used to condemn us [we homosexuals (but usually only we male homosexuals)] as sinful, is 1 Corinthians 6:9 (NIV):
9) Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
…and one of the versions of that Bible verse includes the following (KJV):
9) Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind
Forget the “homosexual” part for now, the important part is that we’re being condemned by the same verse that condemns the "effeminate" part. But I don’t mean "effeminate" in the "effeminate acting" way.
I mean to use the term "effeminate" in the spineless, lily-livered, morally-flimsy, luke-warm, cowardice, Biblical sense. In the way that this article from the Purple Pew elucidates:
Earlier I had written my understanding of “nor effeminate” based on the Matthewe’s Bible of 1549, the Geneva Bible of 1560 and Webster’s dictionary, which states a "weakness marked by excessive refinement"; therefore, the word effeminate here has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Wesley’s commentary on “nor the effeminate” in I Corinthians (6:9) is this: “Nor the effeminate - who live in an easy, indolent way; taking up no cross, enduring no hardship. But how is this? These good-natured, harmless people are ranked with idolators and sodomites!” (a)
See, an effeminate person - whether male or female - is spiritually lazy and morally weak - usually due to an excessive lifestyle of luxury and/or pleasure. They do not take up their cross to follow Christ in word, deed, or in truth.
In that context, Chambers’ article, and as 'verified' by (and yes, I'm using the term loosely) the responses to it, seems to exemplify the meaning of 1 Corinthians 6:9, that the "effeminate [shall not inherit the kingdom of God]."
But as Exodus likes to put it:
In 1 Corinthians 6:9–11, Paul gives a list of all kinds of sinners that will not inherit the kingdom of God, including those that practice homosexuality. But he goes on to say, "and that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." Some Corinthian Christians had formerly been homosexuals, but now were counted among the saints. Now, that's good news indeed!
Which is an even MORE perfect example of the spineless, lily-livered, morally-flimsy, luke-warm, cowardly, AKA "effeminate" behavior -- of the staff at Exodus International, most notably its president, Alan Chambers -- that the Bible condemns.
Let's break it down:
In 1 Corinthians 6:9–11, Paul gives a list of all kinds of sinners that will not inherit the kingdom of God, including those that practice homosexuality.
Except we’re not talking about "practicing homosexuality," we’re talking about homosexuality as in same-gender attraction ITSELF -- as in the HUMAN SEXUALITY of same gender attraction.
Some Corinthian Christians had formerly been homosexuals, but now were counted among the saints.
Well that’s lovely, but "counted among the saints" doesn’t mean the same thing as "became heterosexual," which is what you imply, but fail to clarify.
In addition, by highlighting the ever ambiguous "and that is what some of you were" portion of the Corinthians verse, and in light of Exodus' political motives and connections with Focus on the Family, such calculated obfuscation is clearly subtext meant to portray to the general public that same-gender attraction -- in and of itself -- is a choice.
So you get the point. And this kind of code-speak is typical of the anti-gay industry crowd.
Alan Chambers and the Exodus International staff et al, should get over their own