Painful Parent- Adult Child Religious Conflict more widespread today?

[TranquilMind]

Well, of dd's friends who are gay the ones who have the worst time of it are those with religious parents who refuse to accept what their child is telling them. They are told repeatedly what they are doing and feeling is wrong and sinful. I haven't known any kicked out but I have seen some horrible behavior by those parents and I can't imagine having to live in a home with people like that. 

 

You also have said numerous times maybe it's internal strife or because they are doing something against their beliefs. The one's I'm closest to have differing beliefs than you and their parents so there is no internal struggle there about what is right and wrong. They've been through that and have come to a different conclusion and are content with that decision. 

 

Dds anxiety and depression go way back. She started pretending to be like all the other girls in K when some started talking about what boys they liked. She kept pretending until she was 15. Ten years is a long time and, obviously, it took it's toll. She's slowly getting better with therapy. Her struggle is what outsiders and extended family say and think. It's tough to be a teen and hear often that you are a sinner, disgusting, immoral, unnatural, etc. 

What was the horrible behavior?  They aren't kicking the kids out, you say, though they don't accept what they are hearing.  But what is the behavior you mention?

 

Are people telling your daughter directly that SHE is a sinner, disgusting, immoral, unnatural(which of course would be rude, mean, and awful)? 

 

Or do you actually mean she hears in the community or on the news or somewhere that some people find homosexuality unnatural, immoral and a sin?   This is totally different, so I'm clarifying. 

 

I'm not my sexuality.  I said that way early in this thread, so it is truly hard to relate to people who think they are their sexual behavior.   

 

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by TranquilMind

[MistyMountain]

I don't know what you posted, but I'm really curious how one can simply determine that it isn't the activity causing the depression and drug overuse and sexual promiscuity, but is instead the disapproval of the parents.

 

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Simple confusion of correlation and causation?

Really not sure how one can determine that parental beliefs *cause* any of those dire effects, or whether the activity itself causes it, and parents are conveniently blamed. Where is the proof?

 

I'm not arguing it is good to reject a child, of course, and honestly, I think very few do, especially today, if by "reject" we mean stop talking to the child or only talk to the child in a negative way, or terminate the relationship.

 

I'm not even convinced that maintaining one's religious stance on relationships, long known to the child, in lieu of tossing it out, IS rejecting the child. But let's say it is. Where is the proof that rejecting a child "a little or a lot" (undefined in the brochure that I saw) is the cause of depression, or sexual promiscuity or drug use?

 

Maybe going against what you believe or have been taught is the cause, causing great internal strife that is going to come out somehow?

 

How do we know? I realize you probably aren't going to answer this, because you cut out your answer before, but I am just dropping this here. Sounds like huge assumptions to me, with lots of parental blame.

 

What if the kid does something else the parent and the kid's church has always taught is wrong, and this is something he knows deep down. But he does it anyway. Is the parent to blame if negative effects occur?

 

Parental rejection and bullying are correlated with depression and suicide for things unrelated to this issue. Humans are very social creatures who very much affected by how others perceive them. Depression for a lot of people is a social disease. Loneliness and rejection is also something that can lead to substance abuse. Even people who claim they are not affected by what others think actually are affected when you study it.

 

I know many LGBTIQ people and the ones that are accepted and have a good peer support network are emotionally healthy and they are pursuing their interests, hobbies and carriers. Every year I hear several transsexuals individuals speak about their experiences to help others out there going through a hard time and to put awareness out there. All of them were in very dark place when they were rejected by family and peers. Some did have suicidal thoughts. Once they found a support group they finally were able to be in a better place and to actually pursue their interest or thinks about careers and their life that has nothing to do with their gender identity.

 

I have done reading about this stuff that referenced studies but I only have time to find a link or two in a quick google search. I will try to find things to add later.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23387404

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/health/bullying-suicidal-thoughts/index.html

Edited May 3, 2016 by MistyMountain

[TranquilMind]

The responses you've gotten are so much better than mine. I was trying to find a way to say that while you are adept at tossing in phrases that seem to be done in order to sound knowledgable, the words come across to me as cold. Devoid of feeling. Robotic. I know what your response will be, but I feel embarrassed while reading your views. I'm sure you're quite a pleasant person, but still.

That was funny as heck.  I laughed out loud.

 

Just call me Spock.  

 

I have a perspective different than yours, in that I can focus on the issue and the arguments being made in support or against and not get distracted.

 

Ok.  I just write the way I have always written, and you will find that to be consistent throughout the years in my posts on any subject.  Accusing me of tossing in phrases  "in order to sound knowledgeable"  is so off base that I found it hilarious. 

 

Your post is clearly an ad hominem attack, but note that I possess the maturity and sense of humor that I find no need complain or report it, as some are quick to do. 

 

Now if you wish to address the content of my post to you, that would be welcome too. 

 

 

 

 

[Ravin]

I don't know what you posted, but I'm really curious how one can simply determine that it isn't the activity causing the depression and drug overuse and sexual promiscuity, but is instead the disapproval of the parents. 

 

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?  Simple confusion of correlation and causation? 

Really not sure how one can determine that parental beliefs *cause* any of those dire effects, or whether the activity itself causes it, and parents are conveniently blamed.    Where is the proof?  

 

I'm not arguing it is good to reject a child, of course, and honestly, I think very few do, especially today, if by "reject" we mean stop talking to the child or only talk to the child in a negative way, or terminate the relationship. 

 

  I'm not even convinced that maintaining one's religious stance on relationships, long known to the child, in lieu of tossing it out, IS rejecting the child.  But let's say it is.    Where is the proof that rejecting a child "a little or a lot" (undefined in the brochure that I saw) is the cause of depression, or sexual  promiscuity or drug use?  

 

Maybe going against what you believe or have been taught is the cause, causing great internal strife that is going to come out somehow? 

 

How do we know?   I realize you probably aren't going to answer this, because you cut out your answer before, but I am just dropping this here.  Sounds like huge assumptions to me, with lots of parental blame. 

 

What if the kid does something else the parent and the kid's church has always taught is wrong, and this is something he knows deep down. But he does it anyway.  Is the parent to blame if negative effects occur? 

 

 

This is actually an area of ongoing research, and the claims made are not without substance.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/the-truth-about-transgend_b_8564834.html

 

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

 

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/06/22/3672506/transgender-suicide-rates/

[TranquilMind]

Parental rejection and bullying are correlated with depression and suicide for things unrelated to this issue. Humans are very social creatures who very much affected by how others perceive them. Depression for a lot of people is a social disease. Loneliness and rejection is also something that can lead to substance abuse. Even people who claim they are not affected by what others think actually are affected when you study it.

 

I know many LGBTIQ people and the ones that are accepted and have a good peer support network are emotionally healthy and they are pursuing their interests, hobbies and carriers. Every year I hear several transsexuals individuals speak about their experiences to help others out there going through a hard time and to put awareness out there. All of them were in very dark place when they were rejected by family and peers. Some did have suicidal thoughts. Once they found a support group they finally were able to be in a better place and to actually pursue their interest or thinks about careers and their life that has nothing to do with their gender identity.

 

I have done reading about this stuff that referenced studies but I only have time to find a link or two in a quick google search. I will try to find things to add later.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23387404

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/health/bullying-suicidal-thoughts/index.html

Thank you for actually addressing what I said. Off to read your links to see if there is any research anyone has done and whether it addresses the question I raised about how to pinpoint the cause. 

[TranquilMind]

Parental rejection and bullying are correlated with depression and suicide for things unrelated to this issue. Humans are very social creatures who very much affected by how others perceive them. Depression for a lot of people is a social disease. Loneliness and rejection is also something that can lead to substance abuse. Even people who claim they are not affected by what others think actually are affected when you study it.

 

I know many LGBTIQ people and the ones that are accepted and have a good peer support network are emotionally healthy and they are pursuing their interests, hobbies and carriers. Every year I hear several transsexuals individuals speak about their experiences to help others out there going through a hard time and to put awareness out there. All of them were in very dark place when they were rejected by family and peers. Some did have suicidal thoughts. Once they found a support group they finally were able to be in a better place and to actually pursue their interest or thinks about careers and their life that has nothing to do with their gender identity.

 

I have done reading about this stuff that referenced studies but I only have time to find a link or two in a quick google search. I will try to find things to add later.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23387404

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/health/bullying-suicidal-thoughts/index.html

The first is not available unless I want to spring for $155, if I recall correctly.  There is merely a vague abstract paragraph where a group were given a questionnaire based on their recollections from childhood.   So it is all perception.  Maybe the kid thought he was being rejected and he wasn't.  What constitutes rejection, anyway?  Words need definitions.   Maybe the parent didn't reject the child but the child thought he did.  

There has been more than one occasion where I have read over the years from a kid (say through social media) that the parent "kicked him out" and that he was homeless, where the parent is simultaneously  desperately searching for their child who ran away?  Who is telling the truth here?  That's the problem with unverified recollections.

 

The second is about bullying in school and that is not my question at all.  Parental disapproval is not "bullying".  It could lead to bullying, I suppose, but that is not at issue in my refutation of what the other poster authoritatively stated were causes of depression, suicide, sexual promiscuity, and drug use. 

Edited May 3, 2016 by TranquilMind

[Veritaserum]

Some of us don't have the luxury of laughing off this type of discussion because we have loved ones whose lives are at stake.

 

There is little appreciable difference in hearing "X identity or orientation is [insert negative attribute]" and "you are [insert negative attribute]." We are each defined by various things that comprise ourselves as a whole. Sexual orientation and gender identity are part of that. They're not the sole defining characteristics, but they are certainly key components.

 

"Blue is bad. Blue is against the will of God. People who are blue will go to hell unless they stop being blue or at least agree to stop living a blue lifestyle. God loves red people and red lifestyles. Red is God's divine will and plan. There is no blue in God's plan. Only people who live red lives will go to heaven."

 

If you're Blue, it's difficult to feel loved and accepted by Red people who say things like this. It's difficult to hear anything but, "You are bad. You are against the will of God. People like you will go to hell unless you stop being blue or at least agree to stop living a blue lifestyle. God loves red people and red lifestyles. Red is God's divine will and plan. There is no place for you in God's plan. Only people who live red lives will go to heaven.â€

Edited May 3, 2016 by Veritaserum

[TranquilMind]

This is actually an area of ongoing research, and the claims made are not without substance.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/the-truth-about-transgend_b_8564834.html

 

http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

 

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/06/22/3672506/transgender-suicide-rates/

 

The first is a gay blogger.  That isn't "research", it's someone promoting her views. 

 

Think-progress is so inherently biased that it isn't an appropriate source. 

 

Going to look at the second now. 

 

The second one is a summary about  transgender people, not homosexuals, the latter of which has been the topic here (and the issue in the original posting). 

 

I think we can all agree that trans individuals have a number of additional concerns to deal with, outside of the discussion we have had.  What I did find notable is that just like in the general population, suicide risks rise in poverty and poor health.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by TranquilMind

[hornblower]

The first is not available unless I want to spring for $155, if I recall correctly.  

 

full text of the first is here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235413982_Recollections_of_Parental_Rejection_Self-Criticism_and_Depression_in_Suicidality

[Paige]

 

Edited to add that I realize I missed the link so I went to look at it, expecting research.   There is no research there.  It is merely a brochure with lots of photos of happy families, some diagrams, and lots of words about how a parent must accept this or all these dire results will occur.  

 

 

That is not accurate- there was actually lots of information there and the info needed to find the full, peer-reviewed, journal article if you wanted. 

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6171.2010.00246.x/full

[Greta]

I'm not arguing parental rejection doesn't hurt a child.  I didn't say that at all. 

 

What I am saying is that parental disapproval of homosexuality is not a proven cause of the negative effects listed, which are simply assumed to be the result of parental disapproval in that brochure. 

 

How could one know it is not the kid's own conscience and the resulting disharmony with what he believes causing of all those negative effects?  How do you KNOW, is what I am asking, and that's a reasonable question when someone simply presents a command to do A or B WILL result.  Where is the proof for that assertion?  That's all I am asking.

 

Edited for clarity.

 

 

I had to run out and do some errands before I could reply to you, and Paige already said (better than I will) what I was going to.  But I'll briefly state it anyway.  Your arguments would make sense to me if the study had compared gay and transgendered persons to the population as a whole.  But since it compared gay and transgendered who were accepted by their parents to gay and transgendered who were rejected by their parents, I don't really understand why you're arguing this.

[MistyMountain]

The second link actually said parental was more important then peers but it is just a cnn article.

[Ravin]

The first is a gay blogger.  That isn't "research", it's someone promoting her views. 

 

Think-progress is so inherently biased that it isn't an appropriate source. 

 

Going to look at the second now. 

 

The second one is a summary about  transgender people, not homosexuals, the latter of which has been the topic here (and the issue in the original posting). 

 

I think we can all agree that trans individuals have a number of additional concerns to deal with, outside of the discussion we have had.  What I did find notable is that just like in the general population, suicide risks rise in poverty and poor health.

 

 

The articles have linked references in them. 

[TranquilMind]

Some of us don't have the luxury of laughing off this type of discussion because we have loved ones whose lives are at stake.

 

There is little appreciable difference in hearing "X identity or orientation is [insert negative attribute]" and "you are [insert negative attribute]." We are each defined by various things that comprise ourselves as a whole. Sexual orientation and gender identity are part of that. They're not the sole defining characteristics, but they are certainly key components.

 

"Blue is bad. Blue is against the will of God. People who are blue will go to hell unless they stop being blue or at least agree to stop living a blue lifestyle. God loves red people and red lifestyles. Red is God's divine will and plan. There is no blue in God's plan. Only people who live red lives will go to heaven."

 

If you're Blue, it's difficult to feel loved and accepted by Red people who say things like this. It's difficult to hear anything but, "You are bad. You are against the will of God. People like you will go to hell unless you stop being blue or at least agree to stop living a blue lifestyle. God loves red people and red lifestyles. Red is God's divine will and plan. There is no place for you in God's plan. Only people who live red lives will go to heaven.â€

I was laughing at the leveling of an ad hominem attack about my "cold, robotic answers"  in lieu of a substantive answer, not the topic at hand.  I think this is blatantly obvious to anyone. 

 

You cannot merely switch out meaningful terms for meaningless ones in support of your perspective.    God doesn't address the benign colors of blue and red.  He does address behaviors.  You are attempting to conflate the two, and I don't believe you can conflate the two. 

 

If God instructed us specifically not to DO X and Y behaviors, we do well to take note of this, at the risk of our own health and safety.  There are reasons for boundaries and the disregard of such leads to personal and societal problems and disease. 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by TranquilMind

[Greta]

 

I'm not my sexuality.  I said that way early in this thread, so it is truly hard to relate to people who think they are their sexual behavior.   

 

 

Actually, I think that's exactly what LGBT people want:  to be treated like their sexuality is not the sum of who they are.  

 

That's exactly, I suspect, one of the reasons that some Christians treat homosexuality as worse than other sins, because they are seeing the person as their sexuality.  If I struggle with greed, or gluttony, or whatever, I'm still seen as a whole person who happens to struggle with that issue.  But if I'm gay, I'm seen as gay.  Period.  And that is why a Christian parent who would never consider haranguing his or her child over things like not giving sufficiently to the poor, will make the child's homosexuality a hill to die on, worthy of threatening and sometimes even destroying the relationship.  

 

(ETA:  It's just a theory I have based on the way I've heard those who disapprove talk about homosexuality versus the way they talk about other sins.)

Edited May 3, 2016 by Greta

[Pam in CT]

re: relationship between depression / suicide etc, and parental rejection:

But you are simply assuming a cause-effect situation that may not be present.   You are simply stating without evidence that parents not affirming their child's variant behavior cause depression, drug use, and unwise sexual activity.  

 

Let's say every parent of every kid who engaged in this was whole-heartedly accepting and considered it completely fine and benign. 

 

 

Are you honestly arguing that eliminates the high rates of depression,suicide, drug use, and sexual activity of this group? 

 

I think that is an unsupported leap. 

Edited to add that I realize I missed the link so I went to look at it, expecting research.   There is no research there.  It is merely a brochure with lots of photos of happy families, some diagrams, and lots of words about how a parent must accept this or all these dire results will occur.  
 

As other pp have already addressed the relevant experiment design and controlled variable issues, as well as linked the underlying research to the original pamphlet...

 

 

I'd go back to this...

Human nature and emotional needs being what they are, I'm pretty dumbfounded you would argue that parental rejection doesn't cause emotional harm.  I agree that it's generally wise not to jump to the conclusion that causation equals correlation.  But in this instance, I think the causative element is abundantly clear.  Acceptance is one of our most basic emotional needs.  Rejection is excruciating.

 

 

 

 

... which you, yourself, honed in on (albeit from the perspective of the person on the other side of the rejection) a few days ago, when you pointed out that rejection is so excruciating that -- in selected circumstances that you yourself can imagine -- the actual death of the loved one might feel preferable, to rejection and abandonment:

No one is saying it [death] is easy.  The point was merely that it feels easier sometimes to deal with because at least the person didn't leave because he no longer wants a relationship with you, but merely because he couldn't help it. 

 

Hey, I have lost everyone.  Only one remains from my family of origin.  You don't have to tell me death is hard.  But it's easier than willful abandonment.

 

....  But if someone died instead of having abandoned you, in that way, it is easier only because you can tell yourself that he didn't want to not have a relationship with you, but he just isn't able and would see you if he could. 

 

That's all.  It hurts either way.   But if he abandoned you, that hurts more because he did that intentionally.  Most people don't die intentionally. 

 

 

... and before you jump to say "but a husband abandoning a wife is totally different from a parent not-accepting a child's LBGT lifestyle due to sincerely held religious objections....." -- 

 

...consider the possibility that from the LBGT child's perspective, the nature and the excruciation of the rejection might be similar.  

 

 

(I really do understand that from your perspective, the situations are different.  That's the thing, about boundaries.  We aren't them, and they aren't us.)

[TranquilMind]

That is not accurate- there was actually lots of information there and the info needed to find the full, peer-reviewed, journal article if you wanted. 

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6171.2010.00246.x/full

 

Thank you.  That was interesting and actually in depth.

I found the questions asked of the 53 young people to be questionable though, because of all of the presumptions underlying them.  For example, a very busy parent  or one of an older child who has his own car isn't necessarily going to be going to LGBT events (third question) at all, though that has no bearing on whether he rejects or accepts a child.

 

Rejection isn't defined either.   

And what the heck about "appreciating the hairstyle or clothing"?  Mom or dad have to be complimentary to accept their child?   That goes far beyond acceptance. 

 

Just lots of assumptions in this. 

Family acceptance scale scores were calculated as the sum of whether each event occurred (dichotomized as never versus ever). For example, survey items include:

• • 
  How often did any of your parents/caregivers talk openly about your sexual orientation?
• • 
  How often were your openly LGBT friends invited to join family activities?
• • 
  How often did any of your parents/caregivers bring you to an LGBT youth organization or event?
• • 
  How often did any of your parents/caregivers appreciate your clothing or hairstyle, even though it might not have been typical for your gender?

 

This was relevant:

 

It is noteworthy that family religious affiliation, although linked to lower family acceptance, was positively associated with young adult social support. Follow-up analyses showed that the association between childhood religious affiliation and social support was not significant; thus, childhood religious affiliation is positively linked to social support in young adulthood after accounting for family acceptance. Religious affiliation in adolescence is known to be a factor that promotes well-being; these results indicate that this association is consistent for LGBT young adults only after differences between low and high family acceptance are taken into account.

[TranquilMind]

Actually, I think that's exactly what the LGBT community wants:  to be treated like their sexuality is not the sum of who they are.  

 

That's exactly, I suspect, one of the reasons that some Christians treat homosexuality as worse than other sins, because they are seeing the person as their sexuality.  If I struggle with greed, or gluttony, or whatever, I'm still seen as a whole person who happens to struggle with that issue.  But if I'm gay, I'm seen as gay.  Period.  And that is why a Christian parent who would never consider haranguing his or her child over things like not giving sufficiently to the poor, will make the child's homosexuality a hill to die on, worthy of threatening and sometimes even destroying the relationship.  

 

(ETA:  It's just a theory I have based on the way I've heard those who disapprove talk about homosexuality versus the way they talk about other sins.)

What?   Why do you think that they are seen as gay, instead of as a struggling individual ? 

 

You presumably are not joining groups identifying yourself proudly as a glutton or miser, as if it is the primary marker of your identity, and demanding that others affirm it.... are you?

 

How do you know this same person won't also argue with her child about the failure to tithe or failure to be kind?

[Veritaserum]

I was laughing at the leveling of an ad hominem attack about my "cold, robotic answers" in lieu of a substantive answer, not the topic at hand. I think this is blatantly obvious to anyone.

 

You cannot merely switch out meaningful terms for meaningless ones in support of your perspective. God doesn't address the benign colors of the existence of blue and red. He does address behaviors. You are attempting to conflate the two, and I don't believe you can conflate the two.

 

If God instructed us specifically not to DO X and Y behaviors, we do well to take note of this, at the risk of our own health and safety. There are reasons for boundaries and the disregard of such leads to personal and societal problems and disease.

You and I will probably never agree whether God really does or does not condemn homosexual or other queer identities and behaviors. I've never viewed scripture as a definitive, comprehensive, and perfect explanation of God's will and can't imagine doing so now or in the future. To me scripture is a documentation of humanity's attempts at divine interaction, not a transcript of God's communications with us.

 

It would be a cruel God indeed who would create queer people only to deny them salvation unless they live a heterosexual, cisgender lifestyle. Love, whether queer or straight, isn't harmful. Hatred is.

[TranquilMind]

re: relationship between depression / suicide etc, and parental rejection:

As other pp have already addressed the relevant experiment design and controlled variable issues, as well as linked the underlying research to the original pamphlet...

 

 

I'd go back to this...

 

 

 

 

... which you, yourself, honed in on (albeit from the perspective of the person on the other side of the rejection) a few days ago, when you pointed out that rejection is so excruciating that -- in selected circumstances that you yourself can imagine -- the actual death of the loved one might feel preferable, to rejection and abandonment:

 

 

 

... and before you jump to say "but a husband abandoning a wife is totally different from a parent not-accepting a child's LBGT lifestyle due to sincerely held religious objections....." -- 

 

...consider the possibility that from the LBGT child's perspective, the nature and the excruciation of the rejection might be similar.  

 

 

(I really do understand that from your perspective, the situations are different.  That's the thing, about boundaries.  We aren't them, and they aren't us.)

I understand what you are saying from the child's perspective.

 

Though few of us will argue that we should attempt to accept the abandoning husband's behavior as neutral, because his desire to be free is equally valid to the wife's desire to keep an intact family in a Christian home (better add that limitation, since that is the subject).

 

 

Your statement still assumes both the parent and the child in this scenario have morally neutral stances that should be equally accepted. I think that is just not the case for the devout Christian parent or even the Christian kid.

[Greta]

 

 

What?   Why do you think that they are seen as gay, instead of as a struggling individual ? 

 

 

 

 

I'm most certainly not saying that all Christians who disapprove of homosexuality see it this way, but I've definitely seen that attitude, yes.  When discussing sins that pretty much *everyone* struggles with at some point in their lives, there's compassion.  When discussing homosexuality, there's disgust.  The sin is all they see.  

 

 

You presumably are not joining groups identifying yourself proudly as a glutton or miser, as if it is the primary marker of your identity, and demanding that others affirm it.... are you?

 

 

What's the point of this question?  Gay people do not join groups proudly announcing their homosexuality and demanding that others affirm it.  

 

 

How do you know this same person won't also argue with her child about the failure to tithe or failure to be kind?

 

 

I was talking about haranguing them about it to the point where they threaten the relationship. Do you know anyone who would end their relationship with their child over tithing disagreements?

[TranquilMind]

I'm most certainly not saying that all Christians who disapprove of homosexuality see it this way, but I've definitely seen that attitude, yes.  When discussing sins that pretty much *everyone* struggles with at some point in their lives, there's compassion.  When discussing homosexuality, there's disgust.  The sin is all they see.  

 

 

 

 

What's the point of this question?  Gay people do not join groups proudly announcing their homosexuality and demanding that others affirm it.  

 

 

 

 

I was talking about haranguing them about it to the point where they threaten the relationship. Do you know anyone who would end their relationship with their child over tithing disagreements?

 

Are you serious?  There ARE Lgbt groups everywhere, even in schools and they work hard to silence any opposition anywhere.  I'm wondering if you live elsewhere.

 

[TranquilMind]

I am a Christian parent who unequivacobaly accepts and affirms my child's queer identity. Rejecting a child's queer identity--regardless of a parent's religious affiliation or belief--harms the child. This is not a war against Christian parents. This is a plea for us to stop hurting and even killing our children with our words and actions.

 

There are definitely other factors at play, including a queer person's religious indoctrination growing up and society's acceptance (or lack thereof). However, it is absurd to argue that parental rejection is not a major factor in the health and happiness of a queer person.

 

No one argues that rejection - however that is defined, and in the study that was really questionable, given the questions on the questionnaire - is not a factor.

 

But you (I think it was) said it was the cause of depression, suicide, promiscuity, and drug use.  Blame the parent scenario.

Au contraire.

 

[TranquilMind]

Correct.  Simply arguing "but what about...?" indicates an underlying confusion about how studies are conducted.

No one did that.

 

Here was what I said:

 

Me:  Really not sure how one can determine that parental beliefs *cause* any of those dire effects, or whether the activity itself causes it, and parents are conveniently blamed. Where is the proof?

 

And nothing stated refutes that it could instead be engaging in the activity itself causing all the issues, apart from parental acceptance.  It could be internal dissonance between doing what you were taught and know is wrong. 

 

Again, how do we know?  They immediately jump to blame the parents.  Simply saying that people who are affirmed in this behavior by parents eliminates these problems is demonstratively wrong, even by that study.  The percentages of engagement go down a little bit with parental acceptance, or in one case by half, of this 200 person group. 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by TranquilMind

[TranquilMind]

You and I will probably never agree whether God really does or does not condemn homosexual or other queer identities and behaviors. I've never viewed scripture as a definitive, comprehensive, and perfect explanation of God's will and can't imagine doing so now or in the future. To me scripture is a documentation of humanity's attempts at divine interaction, not a transcript of God's communications with us.

 

It would be a cruel God indeed who would create queer people only to deny them salvation unless they live a heterosexual, cisgender lifestyle. Love, whether queer or straight, isn't harmful. Hatred is.

 

Well, at some point we will.  We will stand before the throne one day and give account for every careless word we utter.   God will say that one or both or neither of us were correct, and examine our intentions.    So we will get it, one day. 

 

I do believe God's Word is a major communication to me today of His will and intentions.  To reduce it to a mere history book is not within my power to do. 

You assume He made homosexuals to be homosexuals. 

 

I assume He did not, any more than He created anyone else to do specifically what He prohibited them to do.  I can't wrap my head around that and agree with you in that this would be cruel.

 

There is that free will thing.  You can't ignore that. 

 

[Joker]

Are you serious? There ARE Lgbt groups everywhere, even in schools and they work hard to silence any opposition anywhere. I'm wondering if you live elsewhere.

 

I told myself I wasn't going to participate in this anymore but I have to speak up here.

 

In regards to clubs in schools that you say silence opposition I call BS in all that we've been involved in. Dd is involved in her school GSA club and they are the ones that people want to silence. If they put up posters, like other groups, they get hateful graffiti. Then the posters must come down and no one is ever caught or punished. They've been on their way to meetings while a Christian group stands on both sides of the hallway singing hymns for them to turn from their wicked ways. Many don't like them being there or being allowed to have a club so they do their best to push them out and shut them up.

[QueenCat]

I told myself I wasn't going to participate in this anymore but I have to speak up here.

 

In regards to clubs in schools that you say silence opposition I call BS in all that we've been involved in. Dd is involved in her school GSA club and they are the ones that people want to silence. If they put up posters, like other groups, they get hateful graffiti. Then the posters must come down and no one is ever caught or punished. They've been on their way to meetings while a Christian group stands on both sides of the hallway singing hymns for them to turn from their wicked ways. Many don't like them being there or being allowed to have a club so they do their best to push them out and shut them up.

 

;( That is awful.......... and these people are showing Jesus' love how? Super sad.

[Greta]

Are you serious?  There ARE Lgbt groups everywhere, even in schools and they work hard to silence any opposition anywhere.  I'm wondering if you live elsewhere.

 

 

 

Okay, I get it now.  What I see as "please stop hating us and discriminating against us and publicly shaming us" you see as "demanding affirmation".  I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this one.

 

ETA:  Yes, LGBT people have every right to form groups to fight against the discrimination that they are so frequently subjected to.  But with the way you worded your post, I thought you were talking about people joining a homeschooling group, for example, and announcing their gluttony or miserliness versus announcing their sexuality and demanding that everyone affirm it.  I've never experienced either one!

Edited May 3, 2016 by Greta

[Spryte]

I told myself I wasn't going to participate in this anymore but I have to speak up here.

 

In regards to clubs in schools that you say silence opposition I call BS in all that we've been involved in. Dd is involved in her school GSA club and they are the ones that people want to silence. If they put up posters, like other groups, they get hateful graffiti. Then the posters must come down and no one is ever caught or punished. They've been on their way to meetings while a Christian group stands on both sides of the hallway singing hymns for them to turn from their wicked ways. Many don't like them being there or being allowed to have a club so they do their best to push them out and shut them up.

We see the same behavior here. :(

[TranquilMind]

I told myself I wasn't going to participate in this anymore but I have to speak up here.

 

In regards to clubs in schools that you say silence opposition I call BS in all that we've been involved in. Dd is involved in her school GSA club and they are the ones that people want to silence. If they put up posters, like other groups, they get hateful graffiti. Then the posters must come down and no one is ever caught or punished. They've been on their way to meetings while a Christian group stands on both sides of the hallway singing hymns for them to turn from their wicked ways. Many don't like them being there or being allowed to have a club so they do their best to push them out and shut them up.

 

 

Nope.  It happens, though you won't see much of it in the mainstream media. 

 

During German class in a Fort Worth school, the teacher was leading a discussion about religious beliefs in Germany when the topic of homosexuality arose. Dakota Ary told one of his classmates, "I'm a Christian and, to me, being homosexual is wrong," according to Liberty Counsel, which is representing Ary.

 

The teacher overheard Ary, wrote an infraction charging him with "possible bullying" and sent him to the principal's office. The teacher indicated on the infraction, "It is wrong to make such a statement in public school." Ary was sentenced to in-school suspension and two days' suspension.

 

Meanwhile, the teacher was allowed to display a picture of two men kissing on what he called a "world wall" in the classroom, and when students were offended, he told them that homosexuality is becoming more prevalent in the world and they should accept it, Liberty Counsel said.

 

Ary's mother, Holly Pope, told Fox News Radio Sept. 22 that her son is a well-grounded 14-year-old who is an honors student, plays on the school football team and is active in his church youth group.

 

"He's been in church his whole life, and he's been taught to stand up for what he believes," Pope said.

 

After a meeting with Pope and her attorney, the school rescinded the two-day suspension and allowed Ary to play in an upcoming football game.

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

Another: 

 

 

 Chase wore a similar shirt April 22 with the additional message "Be Ashamed" and "Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned." Chase said his teacher, David LeMaster, told him he was in violation of the school's dress code and had to remove the T-shirt or be sent to the office. Chase said he refused to take off the shirt and compromise his beliefs that homosexuality is wrong.

 

He was later suspended, after refusing requests by several administrators to remove the T-shirt.

 

According to the lawsuit, Chase was questioned by a deputy sheriff, while he was being detained, and by assistant principal Ed Giles who told him he must "leave his faith in the car" if his religious beliefs are offensive.

 

There are more.    Free Speech isn't suspended merely because you don't like it.    The appropriate response to this is wear a pro-gay T shirt if you like. 

 

[TranquilMind]

Okay, I get it now.  What I see as "please stop hating us and discriminating against us and publicly shaming us" you see as "demanding affirmation".  I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this one.

No, especially not where we see discriminatory behavior, such as the school suspensions in the last post I wrote on this.  This happens all over. 

[TranquilMind]

No one did that.

 

Here was what I said:

 

Me:  Really not sure how one can determine that parental beliefs *cause* any of those dire effects, or whether the activity itself causes it, and parents are conveniently blamed. Where is the proof?

 

And nothing stated refutes that it could instead be engaging in the activity itself causing all the issues, apart from parental acceptance.  It could be internal dissonance between doing what you were taught and know is wrong. 

 

Again, how do we know?  They immediately jump to blame the parents.  Simply saying that people who are affirmed in this behavior by parents eliminates these problems is demonstratively wrong, even by that study.  The percentages of engagement go down a little bit with parental acceptance, or in one case by half, of this 200 person group. 

 

I wonder if anyone will or even can answer this question. Probably not.  Chicken and the egg argument. 

 

[TranquilMind]

Okay, I get it now.  What I see as "please stop hating us and discriminating against us and publicly shaming us" you see as "demanding affirmation".  I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this one.

 

ETA:  Yes, LGBT people have every right to form groups to fight against the discrimination that they are so frequently subjected to.  But with the way you worded your post, I thought you were talking about people joining a homeschooling group, for example, and announcing their gluttony or miserliness versus announcing their sexuality and demanding that everyone affirm it.  I've never experienced either one!

Of course you haven't.

 

With no other behavior proscribed biblically do we form groups and identify ourselves by affirmation of that behavior.    You won't find the the pro-Miser group or the pro-Glutton group. 

[Greta]

No, especially not where we see discriminatory behavior, such as the school suspensions in the last post I wrote on this.  This happens all over. 

 

 

I said the LGBT community wants people to stop publicly shaming them, and then you posted a story about a kid wearing a shirt saying "BE ASHAMED" to the LGBT kids at his school.  I think that proves my point.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Greta

[QueenCat]

Nope.  It happens, though you won't see much of it in the mainstream media. 

 

During German class in a Fort Worth school, the teacher was leading a discussion about religious beliefs in Germany when the topic of homosexuality arose. Dakota Ary told one of his classmates, "I'm a Christian and, to me, being homosexual is wrong," according to Liberty Counsel, which is representing Ary.

 

The teacher overheard Ary, wrote an infraction charging him with "possible bullying" and sent him to the principal's office. The teacher indicated on the infraction, "It is wrong to make such a statement in public school." Ary was sentenced to in-school suspension and two days' suspension.

 

Meanwhile, the teacher was allowed to display a picture of two men kissing on what he called a "world wall" in the classroom, and when students were offended, he told them that homosexuality is becoming more prevalent in the world and they should accept it, Liberty Counsel said.

 

Ary's mother, Holly Pope, told Fox News Radio Sept. 22 that her son is a well-grounded 14-year-old who is an honors student, plays on the school football team and is active in his church youth group.

 

"He's been in church his whole life, and he's been taught to stand up for what he believes," Pope said.

 

After a meeting with Pope and her attorney, the school rescinded the two-day suspension and allowed Ary to play in an upcoming football game.

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

Another: 

 

 

 Chase wore a similar shirt April 22 with the additional message "Be Ashamed" and "Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned." Chase said his teacher, David LeMaster, told him he was in violation of the school's dress code and had to remove the T-shirt or be sent to the office. Chase said he refused to take off the shirt and compromise his beliefs that homosexuality is wrong.

 

He was later suspended, after refusing requests by several administrators to remove the T-shirt.

 

According to the lawsuit, Chase was questioned by a deputy sheriff, while he was being detained, and by assistant principal Ed Giles who told him he must "leave his faith in the car" if his religious beliefs are offensive.

 

There are more.    Free Speech isn't suspended merely because you don't like it.    The appropriate response to this is wear a pro-gay T shirt if you like. 

 

 

 

If the context given is accurate, I would not think the first student was bullying, as it came up in classroom discussion and he did not tell any specific student that he thought they were wrong or that they were sinning or anything else. However, in the 2nd situation, I'd have required the removal of the shirt but that comes more from believing that shock value shirts are distracting to the educational environment and none should be allowed in public schools. Many schools do have this policy and I'm wondering if that was the basis for this particular school requiring the removal.

 

[justasque]

    Free Speech isn't suspended merely because you don't like it.   

 

 

I agree.  There's a tricky line to walk when the speech is specifically critical of other students, as speaking freely can cross the line into bullying, especially when directed at a group that has historically been bullied without censure of the bullies.  However, in general, students' speech rights (in the US) don't stop at the schoolhouse door.  In the stories you shared, the administration backed off when called on their restriction of speech.  School administrations make unconstitutional decisions sometimes; they don't always understand the nuances of the law.  These stories usually make the news when they first happen.  However, confronted with a "lawyer letter" and running it by their own legal council, administrators who are in the wrong usually back off.  

[Veritaserum]

Well, at some point we will. We will stand before the throne one day and give account for every careless word we utter. God will say that one or both or neither of us were correct, and examine our intentions. So we will get it, one day.

 

I do believe God's Word is a major communication to me today of His will and intentions. To reduce it to a mere history book is not within my power to do.

You assume He made homosexuals to be homosexuals.

 

I assume He did not, any more than He created anyone else to do specifically what He prohibited them to do. I can't wrap my head around that and agree with you in that this would be cruel.

 

There is that free will thing. You can't ignore that.

 

*weary sigh* I forgot that there are people who still beleive that homosexuality or other queer identities are choices rather than just part of who they are.

 

Yep, neither of us will know who is right until we're dead. However, I know that I feel much more ethical and Christian when I demonstrate love in this life instead of worrying about potential rewards or punishments in the afterlife.

 

I can't imagine God will fault me for loving the outcasts. After all, that's what Jesus did when He was here.

[Joules]

This looks like it might be a helpful list of research articles.  Not all of them are free, but with some googling the details can be found:

http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-acceptancerejection-of-lgbt-youth-2/

 

[TranquilMind]

full text of the first is here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235413982_Recollections_of_Parental_Rejection_Self-Criticism_and_Depression_in_Suicidality

 

Thank you.  Will read that in a bit.  I didn't find that at first. 

 

[TranquilMind]

*weary sigh* I forgot that there are people who still beleive that homosexuality or other queer identities are choices rather than just part of who they are.

 

Yep, neither of us will know who is right until we're dead. However, I know that I feel much more ethical and Christian when I demonstrate love in this life instead of worrying about potential rewards or punishments in the afterlife.

 

I can't imagine God will fault me for loving the outcasts. After all, that's what Jesus did when He was here.

Even the RCC doesn't exclude the possibility of genetic influence, but it does proscribe the behaviors. 

 

Jesus did demonstrate love by doing things for people and telling the the truth, as we all must, within our realm of influence.

 

The difference is that then He told them to go and sin no more. 

Edited May 3, 2016 by TranquilMind

[TranquilMind]

I agree.  There's a tricky line to walk when the speech is specifically critical of other students, as speaking freely can cross the line into bullying, especially when directed at a group that has historically been bullied without censure of the bullies.  However, in general, students' speech rights (in the US) don't stop at the schoolhouse door.  In the stories you shared, the administration backed off when called on their restriction of speech.  School administrations make unconstitutional decisions sometimes; they don't always understand the nuances of the law.  These stories usually make the news when they first happen.  However, confronted with a "lawyer letter" and running it by their own legal council, administrators who are in the wrong usually back off.  

 

Right.  They did back off, but should you have to get an attorney to be free to state your disparate beliefs?  Just how fragile are these kids today that they are being taught not to tolerate any dissension with their perspectives whatsoever?  In the one case, the problem was the teacher's mistaken beliefs and actions. 

 

[TranquilMind]

If the context given is accurate, I would not think the first student was bullying, as it came up in classroom discussion and he did not tell any specific student that he thought they were wrong or that they were sinning or anything else. However, in the 2nd situation, I'd have required the removal of the shirt but that comes more from believing that shock value shirts are distracting to the educational environment and none should be allowed in public schools. Many schools do have this policy and I'm wondering if that was the basis for this particular school requiring the removal.

 

 

I agree with you.  In the first case, the teacher was clearly out of line, but there are those who would support suspending this kid for the mere utterance of an unpopular belief.

 

In the second case, I think that doesn't hold, because if I am remembering correctly, the students had a previous day where they all wore pro-gay shirts.  So this was his response in kind.  If the first is permitted, so must be the second.  Otherwise, maybe a "no slogan or images" rule is fine.

[Veritaserum]

Even the RCC doesn't exclude the possibility of genetic influence, but it does proscribe the behaviors.

 

Jesus did demonstrate love by doing things for people and telling the the truth, as we all must, within our realm of influence.

 

The difference is that then He told them to go and sin no more.

I will not "lovingly" drive people into the pit of despair that is created by condemning their God-given identities and orientations. Have you ever held a suicidal queer person in your arms who was driven there by the "loving" condemnation of people around them? I have.

 

If God condemns me to hell for refusing to speak "truths" that kill, so be it. I wouldn't want to be with such a god, anyway.

[QueenCat]

I agree with you.  In the first case, the teacher was clearly out of line, but there are those who would support suspending this kid for the mere utterance of an unpopular belief.

 

In the second case, I think that doesn't hold, because if I am remembering correctly, the students had a previous day where they all wore pro-gay shirts.  So this was his response in kind.  If the first is permitted, so must be the second.  Otherwise, maybe a "no slogan or images" rule is fine.

 

With that info, I'd concur. Either you can wear your opinion or not, but not one group can and the other cannot.

[justasque]

...You assume He made homosexuals to be homosexuals. 

 

I assume He did not, any more than He created anyone else to do specifically what He prohibited them to do.  I can't wrap my head around that and agree with you in that this would be cruel.

...

 

This, I think, is the key point upon which hinges much difference of opinion.  And this is where it is so very important, when trying to understand the seemingly problematic behavior of others, to listen to their testimony.  TranquilMind, I can see that you haven't had the opportunity to watch a young person you know well and love grow up gay or trans.  You've not listened to them as they struggled to figure out what they were feeling.  You've not been there as they agonized whether telling their friends, their loved ones, their parents, about what they were experiencing, through fear that their much-loved, much-valued friends, loved ones, parents might reject them.  You've not gently told them that they need not decide between being honest about their crush on someone of the same sex, and believing in God.  You've not seen how their coming of age is not so different than your own was, save the gender of their crushes.  You've not had them look into your eyes and ask if they dare to hope for what they've been raised to aim for - a loving partner, a faithful marriage, an honorable life within the family - or whether they must plan to leave and make their own way in the world, without family, as so many who have walked the path before them had to do.  If you had watched this, listened to this, tried to be there for a young person who was working through all this, you'd know, absolutely for sure, that the young person did not choose this path, but that it was given to them to walk.  And you'd do your best to walk alongside them.

[TranquilMind]

I will not "lovingly" drive people into the pit of despair that is created by condemning their God-given identities and orientations. Have you ever held a suicidal queer person in your arms who was driven there by the "loving" condemnation of people around them? I have.

 

If God condemns me to hell for refusing to speak "truths" that kill, so be it. I wouldn't want to be with such a god, anyway.

 

It is really hard to have any fruitful discussion when there is insistence on a basic assumption that God is bi-polar, both creating someone gay and then sadistically condemning the behavior that results from His creation.

 

No one wants to follow that God. 

 

[TranquilMind]

This, I think, is the key point upon which hinges much difference of opinion.  And this is where it is so very important, when trying to understand the seemingly problematic behavior of others, to listen to their testimony.  TranquilMind, I can see that you haven't had the opportunity to watch a young person you know well and love grow up gay or trans.  You've not listened to them as they struggled to figure out what they were feeling.  You've not been there as they agonized whether telling their friends, their loved ones, their parents, about what they were experiencing, through fear that their much-loved, much-valued friends, loved ones, parents might reject them.  You've not gently told them that they need not decide between being honest about their crush on someone of the same sex, and believing in God.  You've not seen how their coming of age is not so different than your own was, save the gender of their crushes.  You've not had them look into your eyes and ask if they dare to hope for what they've been raised to aim for - a loving partner, a faithful marriage, an honorable life within the family - or whether they must plan to leave and make their own way in the world, without family, as so many who have walked the path before them had to do.  If you had watched this, listened to this, tried to be there for a young person who was working through all this, you'd know, absolutely for sure, that the young person did not choose this path, but that it was given to them to walk.  And you'd do your best to walk alongside them.

 

So what you are saying is that if you only know someone intimately who is personally struggling with this, then you know that scripture is wrong on this issue? 

 

 

[*Lulu*]

Right.  They did back off, but should you have to get an attorney to be free to state your disparate beliefs?  Just how fragile are these kids today that they are being taught not to tolerate any dissension with their perspectives whatsoever?  In the one case, the problem was the teacher's mistaken beliefs and actions. 

 

 

These kids today are incredibly resilient and open. 

 

These kids today are able to form friendships across ethnic and religious lines that a few generations back would have been unthinkable.

 

These kids today are able to treat those with differences as equals instead of the brunt of teasing and cruelty.

 

These kids today are able to withstand a near constant stream of media input telling them that they are not enough unless...

 

These kids today are capable of so much kindness and compassion, unless the examples shown by and climate created by the adults in authority teach them that all those things aren't important.

[TranquilMind]

These kids today are incredibly resilient and open. 

 

These kids today are able to form friendships across ethnic and religious lines that a few generations back would have been unthinkable.

 

These kids today are able to treat those with differences as equals instead of the brunt of teasing and cruelty.

 

These kids today are able to withstand a near constant stream of media input telling them that they are not enough unless...

 

These kids today are capable of so much kindness and compassion, unless the examples shown by and climate created by the adults in authority teach them that all those things aren't important.

You mean like the teacher did when he silenced this kid in German class and gave him a two day suspension? 

[justasque]

Right.  They did back off, but should you have to get an attorney to be free to state your disparate beliefs?  Just how fragile are these kids today that they are being taught not to tolerate any dissension with their perspectives whatsoever?  In the one case, the problem was the teacher's mistaken beliefs and actions. 

 

 

School administrators sometimes make decisions that are unconstitutional.  It would be nice if they didn't, but they are human, often poorly trained in legal matters, and expected to be experts on everything from the education of special needs kids, to personnel matters, to budget decisions, to transportation issues, to the finer points of their state's homeschooling laws.  So, these things happen sometimes.  It would be better if they didn't, but we've got a lot of public schools in the US, and it is unrealistic to expect every administrator to make every decision perfectly.  Usually, the issues can be addressed by a "lawyer letter" from the non-profit constitutional-rights-protecting organization of your choice.  So we rightly should make a fuss when an administrator makes the wrong call, but we should be careful about drawing broad conclusions from a few data points.