Tuesday, August 30, 2011

 

A Christian Challenge to Baylor's Policy on Gay Men and Lesbians



So, here we go-- it is time, after a few mis-steps, for the September project I have been hinting around about for a while now. It starts today.

Back in October, I published an article in the Huffington Post titled Repentance of an Anti-Gay Bigot, in which I admitted a history of bigotry towards gays and lesbians. In the wake of that piece, I heard from dozens of people, several of whom were former students of mine describing what it was like to be gay at Baylor, a school which bars gay men and lesbians from employment as faculty and has barred the formation of student support groups. I was chastened and saddened to hear these stories.

The reason I started this blog was to stay connected to my students. I am loyal to them, admire them, and do my best to help them. When they are hurt, particularly when I was complicit... that is a big deal to me.

My plan to confront Baylor on this policy was simple: Run an op-ed in the local paper (the Waco Tribune Herald), and then speak locally in Waco about the issue. The op-ed was set to run this past Sunday. However, when I woke up and checked, it was not there. Instead, a version of that piece is now being featured on the front page of the Huffington Post, which gets about a million visitors a day.

There were two disappointments I dealt with this week. One of those, obviously, was the Trib's choice not to run my piece on Sunday. However, this isn't "censorship," in any sense of that word. Like every other newspaper, the owners and managers of the Trib have the right to decide what goes into the paper-- none of us have the right to force a paper to print our thoughts. Are those choices political? Of course they are, and that is the nature of the business. It is one of the prerogatives of owning a newspaper, and I certainly don't begrudge them that prerogative. I'm glad that the Trib has local ownership, and I will still subscribe to the on-line edition of that paper to read the work of some of my favorite writers and keep track of one of my favorite places.

That said, though, if the intent was to forestall discussion of this topic it was a shortsighted decision. The Trib has a relatively small readership, and content is not freely available on the web because they have a paywall. As those making the decision might have known, I write fairly regularly (for someone with a day job) for the Dallas Morning News and the Huffington Post, and pushing me away from the Trib to those outlets would simply expose the discussion to many more people. Sadly, my hope that this could be a local discussion have been foiled. I still hope to discuss it on local television and radio. Still, even if that is pulled away, I can't be silent, and know that there are those outside of Waco who would be eager to discuss this. The issue is too important not to speak out. I have nothing to gain from this, I know; I will likely lose friends, influence, and some of my connections to Baylor, a place I love enough to try to make better.

The President of Baylor (Ken Starr) is, like me, an appellate attorney who is an academic as well-- he is just much more accomplished and talented than I am (he really is). Those two vocations that we share, however, both have at their core a central belief: That what is true and valuable is discerned through discussion. Such honest and open dialogue is also a Christian imperative: As President Starr put it himself, "In the spirit of the venerable biblical tradition, if we have issues to resolve, let us resolve them together."

Please help me continue this discussion, whether you agree with me or not. Make a comment on the Huffington Post article, put it on your facebook wall with a comment, or email it to someone.

And maybe I will see you later this week back down in Texas....


Comments:
Mark, I deeply admire you for seeking to engage this issue in conversation. This strikes me as one of the most important issue for Christians (and non-Christians) to address at this point in the evolution of the faith and our culture. As you know this has been a very controversial issue here in VA, yet incrementally we appear to be moving forward in an inclusive manner. At the risk of a simplistic theology, it strikes me the core of Christianity is to be found in the first two commandments, as you alluded to on Sunday: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” and “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” By extension, it strikes me Christ deeply longs to welcome all believers to his table … and certainly to schools, institutions and churches that invoke HIS name. There are no asterisks in the second Commandment. Why should we do any less or expect any less? Know HoCo is praying for you Mark.
 
I am proud to call you a friend and former Professor. I always appreciated that you were one who did more than talk of kindness, but instead demanded institutional kindness from places like Baylor. Let me know if I can be of any help. I know you are still wired in at Baylor, but one of my oldest and closest friends is Starr's Chief of Staff, so perhaps I can help.
 
“I know; I will likely lose friends, influence, and some of my connections to Baylor”
Losing a friend or the prospect of losing a friend is always heart breaking, but at the expense of being callous…what insight, perspective or support does a bigoted friend offer that is worth fretting over losing? I have no comment for the loss of influence from bigoted colleagues, because if I were you I wouldn’t know what to do with it.
I admire your support and dedication for those who reached out to you seeking your influence and voice to speak up and I hope you will be heard and things will change.
 
I question the value and depth of any friendship lost over respectful disagreement about these matters. I think you may be surprised at the number of allies you will find in the school administration. It is, of course, the constantly aggrieved alums that always stand in the way of progress at Baylor.
 
Jayhawk-- There's no better ally than you! Tomorrow may be a good time to reach out to that friend. Send me an email...
 
Well, hell... I just may have to call you "Skeeter!" Making changes and challenging the "done thing" always results in losing friends. However, you gain new ones along the way.
 
Professor Osler,

I think your approach to this issue is both necessary and thoughtful. Both my husband and I attended Baylor for graduate school and will continue to follow this issue with you. As a student ambassador in the law school, I called many of the admitted students to discuss any questions they had about Baylor. A significant number of admitted and well qualified students weren't particularly interested (although apparently interested enough to apply), because of what they perceived as Baylor's religious restrictions. This disappointed me.

My husband's take on the issue was that the religious aspect of Baylor was important to the school's identity and targeted student population, and that therefore there was nothing to be disappointed about.

I appreciate your attitude that Baylor can be accepting of gay and lesbian students and professors without losing their identity as a Christian institution.
 
Jayhawk, I am curious about your contention that "the constantly aggrieved alums that always stand in the way of progress at Baylor". There are alumni of all shapes and sizes, of course, but I vigorously disagree with your conclusion, and I know that it is not accurate.

It serves no argument to just blame some group about which you appear to know so little about.

The issue deserves thoughtful discussion, and I would be pleased to read, and contribute if I have anything to add.
 
Oso-- Jayhawk, despite the moniker, is actually a Baylor alum who did his time in Waco.
 
Prof, I'm cool with Jayhawk as a fellow alumnus, but I still disagree with his opinion on the alumni being resistant to "progress".

Here's a suspicion I have--the alumni of pre-90 are perhaps more tolerant to both viewpoints and lifestyles than the more recent vintage. I can't prove that suspicion, of course. In the most recent struggles over the direction that Baylor will sail, it is the alumni (or at least the organized ones) who have pressed for more tolerance and less dogmatism.

Maybe my objection is only to the broad brush with which Jay painted.

I derail.

The substance of the issue remains for discussion.

Carry on.
 
Ah, yes, once more the christians debate whether to include a minority group in their list of 'acceptable' humans. Why does this recurring desire to refuse admittance to those perceived to be 'different', therefore 'other, bad, sinners, etc., keep recurring in what is supposed to be such a loving religion?

I know the 'love the sinner, hate the sin' argument, but when a 'sin' is a genetic trait, such as color, etc. that the christians have hated in the past, one has to be a bit of a doubter about the whole loving idea.

I do not understand why this is a big deal - people fall in love, have families, form friendships, live their lives. Why does it matter what color they are or with whom they form these relationships?

I know that logic and religion have very little to do with each other. I only feel pain for those Baylor and others exclude from their 'club', but I can't understand why they do so.

Lee
 
Lee - right on!
 
Did you expect the Trib to publish that given its new owner?
 
Yes, I did.
 
I was curious if you could explain an important point to me that I feel is not addressed either here or in the HuffPo piece, do you believe homosexuality to be a sin? If the desire is that Baylor allow gays and lesbians to come to the university so that they can learn that Christ loves them and died for them and that the same God gave us the Ten Commandments to guide us to live the best life possible then I can see your point. If you are trying to say that Baylor should simply accept homosexuality as a non-sinful lifestyle then I must disagree with you.

As to your point about Baylor needing to enforce it's no sex outside of marriage rules consistently I can only see that truly being an issue with regard to athletes as you stated. I think anyone claiming that Baylor polices students sexual behavior though is lying. Baylor's only taken action against LGBT students who have tried to attack Baylor. Emily Niemann left b/c she thought she would be persecuted for being gay. I remember a student being kicked out of Truett for being gay but that was after he went to the press and said I'm gay and I'm at Baylor's seminary and they say they won't allow gays.

The only thing I feel you are correct on is that they need to be consistent with the way the apply rules to athletes. Particularly, female athletes who become pregnant are removed but male athletes who father children are not. Outside of athletes, I feel that the university's typical way of dealing with students where they try to police sex, alcohol, drugs very closely in the dorms but acknowledge that there is less that they can do once students move off campus is correct. I believe that Baylor's desire is to state that it does not allow sinful behavior and to do it's best to ensure that that behavior is not tolerated within its physical boundaries but not to act as the sin police for students once they leave those boundaries.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

#