Going Public, or Why I Blog

Someone anonymously posted a question that basically said "Why go public with this?" I thought I'd respond with a post, because I'm sure it is a common question. While I can't speak for my father, I know why I am writing this blog, which I think is a related question. This is not the first time a transgendered person has been discriminated against by their employer, and it probably won't be the last. However, if we draw attention to it, people will at least be aware of the issue, and may act to prevent a similar situation where they work. This might happen at a Christian College or University, where they take steps to define where the stand on the issue in advance, so that they might have a BFOQ. Or the issue may cause them to seek to understand more about what it means to be transgendered, and they might put affirmative policies in place. Either way it prevents illegal discrimination. While we can't eliminate these types of situations entirely, we can hope to lessen them.

If you think Spring Arbor University has taken a stance that is incorrect, publicity might help to change their minds. I assume SAU makes decisions like these with some regard for what their supporters (financial and otherwise) might think about the issue. If they have taken a position that is different than what these supporters might wish them to take, the only way for them to hear that is to make the story public. Most of those that care about this situation probably now know about it. If enough contact SAU, they may choose to moderate their stance and be more open to a reasonable mediation (even a reinstatement?), preventing this from having to go to court. Of course, many people will not make up their minds immediately upon hearing about the story. Those open-minded individuals will want to hear from different perspectives. That is what this blog is about: having a discussion.

In revealing this story to the press, some activist groups may try to claim that this story in fact supports their cause. This is what activist groups do. They spin a story and try and use it to further their own cause. Honestly, I think many activists have tried to spin this story to support their cause against the facts at hand. For instance, my father is not gay. We can't stop an activist group from doing what they will with the story, but we can be true to the facts of the case, and state how we view the issue in situations like this. The point of going public is not to rile up activist groups, but to hopefully further understanding and allow open-minded people to decide on the facts. Activist groups are pretty close-minded, so there is really no purpose in trying to have a discussion with them.

The anonymous poster noted that (paraphrasing) "it is easy to make scripture say what you want it to." I agree that there are ways of "proof-texting" for many arguments, but that is far from being a "Biblical stance." Acceptable methods for interpreting scripture will not look at a single verse, but also the verse in relation to other verse which might address the issue. When you look at all the verse that might apply, you may find you still can reach different conclusions. If the Bible does not decide an issue, we as Christians may take different viewpoints, but we should be gracious with those who disagree. There are many things that are "non-essentials" in the Christian faith, and I'd put whether it is acceptable to wear jewelry or not in the same category.

Another side note: I've seen more anonymous commentors then I typically do on other blogs. That's okay. I understand that this is a difficult issue to talk about, and I hope the ability to comment anonymously allows more to participate in this discussion. If possible, though, I'd ask that anonymous commentors use some way of differentiating themselves from the other anonymous commentors, so that we know you're not really all the same person.