Friday, May 21, 2010

I'm losing patience

It appears to me that I'm losing patience with people who oppose me or are critical of my views. I've been "nice" about to my limit.

Yesterday my friend, Betty, pointed out levels of decision-making, I suppose it was, that she's been reading about. She described three levels. There are visceral reactions of anger and the "fight or flight" mode, referred to as reptilian. Then there are reactions which can be filed under a more mammalian level, and love falls in that category. Finally, the highest level would be toward reason, and we couldn't figure out exactly what creature type that would be, but we still understood that the third level would be most desirable. Maybe a blue creature like the Na'vi of Avatar?

As hard as I've tried to stay within the two higher levels, where I use love and reason, sometimes I slip right into CHOMPING ALLIGATOR mode. It happened when someone turned ugly toward my daughter, who was defending an attack on her dad. I found it totally uncalled-for, and I lashed out. Wrong. It accomplished/accomplishes nothing at all, except to look reptilian.

It gets draining to always respond nicely. As much as I practice and lean on my spiritual connection, it still helps to have the support I get from people like Betty - who "get it." Even at my new job, I was brought to tears yesterday by a co-worker who "gets it" without me having to explain who I am or why I support those I support.

I get astounded by the patience of others who have worked so much longer than I have to bring understanding and build bridges between diverse communities! I feel like progress is coming, and I hope to goodness that I can help in the evolution toward understanding. I don't want to turn into a reptile!

Gay Bill Offends Souder's "Moral Views" | News |

Gay Bill Offends Souder's "Moral Views" | News |

Being from Indiana, I have to express my offense at Mr. Mark Souder's recent revelatory behavior. In addition, as recently as last November, Souder declared that as a Christian, he objected to the bill to benefit Domestic Partners.

How is it that "Christians" like Souder cannot see how abhorrent his discrimination is, as well as his self-righteous attitude, thinking he's being persecuted if he spouts that selfsame discriminatory speech. I just don't get it.

Now we have found out that he's doin' the nasty with someone other than his wife. Well, it doesn't fly. At least he's ashamed enough to step down from his legislative position, so that he can stop being such a hypocrite.

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Boltz story carried in The New York Times

A few weeks ago, an e-mail came to the website, and the result is an article by Sam Freedman of The New York Times which appeared Friday online.  Saturday morning (May 15, 2010) there will be a version of it in the print version. Both Ray and myself were interviewed for this article, and I want to share it. 

Two years ago, about this time of year, my ex-husband and I were deciding when and how to open up with the public about him being gay.  I was ready, and I was tired of keeping secrets about why we divorced.  But one of the reasons Ray HAD to "come out" was so that he could continue his gift of sharing his new songs and his voice with the public.  He didn't want to hide behind any false assumptions that he is straight, and he needed to be honest.

Somehow I had emerged from the emotional trauma of being the straight wife of a loving but gay man, and I became an advocate for equal rights and acceptance of all LGBTQ people.  I knew that if anyone could have "changed" from gay to straight, it would have been my (ex-)husband.  And because of that, I came to realize that other straight individuals shouldn't unknowingly marry someone who can never be fully intimate with them, no matter how much they intend to be so.  I decided to say as often as I need to say it:  God makes people, and we are made as sexual beings.  Some of us are straight, and some are gay.

I'm not sure there can be any more hurt when a beloved spouse reveals to his or her mate that they are gay.  Somehow it seems worse than "just" having an affair, because there is nothing that can solve the problem.  No amount of prayer, counseling, or trying can change one's sexual orientation.  Confronting this truth made me even doubt that any love God has for me must surely be shown in strange ways, since this isn't the life I expected when I said, "I do."  Other women and men shouldn't have to experience this "discovery," nor the pain of such a hopeless secret that has no fix.

So, is there a solution?  I think there is.  The solution is to accept ALL people, and to realize that gay people should not have to pretend to be straight, and should not marry straight ones without FULL information and consent.  My hope is that just like it helps other closeted gay people when someone comes out, I need to be "out" as a straight spouse.  I have nothing to hide, and I'm not ashamed.  Sharing my story?  I'm OUT, I'm proud, and I'm honest.

Friday, May 14, 2010

The ethics of re-selling books (ones I don't agree with)

Ethics:  the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics. 

Am I being ethical when I re-sell books on Amazon that clearly don't share my politics?  If I no longer want a book, for whatever reason, and I decide I can re-sell it, should I?  Is it wrong of me to foist my former fundamentalist outlook on those who still have that viewpoint?  

What I'm talking about is the quandry I find myself in when I go to list books on Amazon with titles like this: 
1. Christian Politics Rocking America 
2. Turning the hearts of the fathers, by Ron Luce (with a contribution by Ted Haggard)
3. God Today

I mean, that #2 one is autographed by Ron Luce (not personalized).

What I'm thinking is that if I get a buck or two, why not?  Then again, I surely don't want to add even a smidgen to the Tea Party group!  While I don't agree with the conservative Fox-News watcher, I still have a Christian worldview in keeping with the mainstream church, and I want people to deepen their faith in a loving God of the Bible.  Reading certain books can support or point to differences that each of us feel about various issues.  

After all, I recently added "ads" to my blog, from which I gain a slight amount of cash when someone clicks on those ads.  I found a way to omit the political ones that I found offensive (and contrary to my political position), and I hope that the ones that are selected to accompany my blog will interest some readers.  Including ads on the blog seemed to make sense, but I don't want to contribute to anti-gay sentiment.

 I don't have any books by EX---S, and if I did, I'd burn them, because it's wrong to pass their information to ANYONE.   A few years ago I did re-sell some Focus on the Family stuff, when I cleaned out my stash of "books I'm never going to read."  I don't even like stuff from most Christian bookstores (never did).  I'm more into historical narratives, memoirs and biographies of long-dead pioneers, especially women and their stories. 

Here's my call for this issue:  I've tossed the Politics book in the trash can.  I won't re-sell any book that spews hatred.  But I don't mind making a little money on books I'm never going to pick up and read. 

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Further questions about why I don't publish certain comments that I deem as hurtful

One of the very thoughtful people who wrote some comments that I later refused to publish is Hadley Baker.  He and I have shared a couple e-mails, and although I consider his input to be worthy of dialogue, I do not agree with his views on gay people.  He wrote to me last week, and has agreed that I can use his name in sharing what he had to say.     

Hadley wrote this:  
I know you did not choose to publish my last comment on your blog.  I guess I would like to just leave you a final thought.  I would also like to thank you for emailing me back on my last email and comment.  Here's my thought:
I cannot help but notice that those who share your view on sexual orientation, gay marriage, etc. seem very close minded to opposing views.  I know it could easily be said that those who share my view are the same way.  But here is the difference as I see it.  I am not trying to silence the voice of people who share your view.  If someone wants to speak out and voice their beliefs on gay marriage, sexual orientation, etc., I do not have a problem with that.  I think is their constitutional right, even though I disagree with them.  However, in many modern countries of the world those who deem homosexuality to be immoral are being silenced. 
It would seem to any objective person that your agenda is to tell people like me that their beliefs are wrong.  You don't just want us to hear you, you want us to agree with you.  And now the governments of this world are getting involved and attacking the church or those with a moral objection to homosexuality.  It's happening in Canada and in the UK.  Soon enough in the US, people like me may be thrown in jail because of our "hate speech" (which is not hatred at all).  I just find it ironic that you would not want to publish views that disagree with yours, as though you are nervous to debate a view that challenges your own.
As I have said before, I am not angry at you, or Ray, or anyone else in the gay community (including supporters).  But I do not understand why people like me are being called a "hater"...since when is someone filled with hate because they adhere to their sincere beliefs of the Bible?  I do not understand this at all.  I can say as someone who disagrees with you, that you will do a lot more to gain merit and credibility if you will be open to dialogue rather than diatribe.  And I would say the same thing to the many people who share my views.  We all need to be open to discussion, to looking at the Bible and seeing what it really says.  Just a thought.  Thanks for hearing me out.
Hadley Baker
Dallas, TX is my reply:
(and I made just a couple edits)

Hi John,

Sorry I'm just getting back with you.  I had my daughter and granddaughter here since Tuesday, and just haven't had time to reply to your courteous e-mail.  My daughter's trip was a short one, and all I wanted to do when I wasn't working was to hold the baby.  :)

You are asking about why I won't publish certain viewpoints, and your impression is that I am "nervous to debate a view that challenges" [mine].  No, that isn't the case, but let me explain. 

I read over the article on the street preacher in the UK, and I see where you think Christians are being silenced.  It appears to me that he was doing "street-preaching," and that he was expressing himself in regard to how he sees gay people.  He sees them as sinful and a threat to society.  He was silenced.

Meanwhile, I have read 1000s of e-mails directed to Ray and myself (sent to us as comments on his website), saying the same thing with slight variations, over and over:  Gays don't know the Bible.  Ray (specifically) has chosen a sinful lifestyle.  Fans are saddened and disappointed.  Ray didn't trust God.  Gay people just need to turn to Jesus - really.  Ray is leading others to hell.  Ray is a monster who was never saved.  Ray should just ignore what he feels.  If gay people were really saved, they wouldn't have "this problem."  Ray is demon-possessed.  Gays don't deserve forgiveness, as they have turned away from God.  Ray purposely deceived others as he sang.  (and MORE and more and more comments on blogs)  This is what we don't need more of, anywhere. 

Let's see---how many more phrases can I recite?  Plenty.  And honestly, do you think that fundamentalists will stop saying those things?  I don't think so.  They are perfectly free (and legally able) to continue to say those things IN THEIR OWN CHURCHES.  That is not going to change quickly - although I do believe it should and it is what I work toward.

I could nicely reply that I disagree with how you see all this - but it will not do me any good.  I can only reject offensive things that are said on MY blog, and try to help others tell their stories.  Each one of them deserve to have a venue where the rhetoric is NOT SAID.  And my blog is one of those places. 

I've wanted to sarcastically reply to some people's comments and say, "Oh, gee, now I see!  Your meanness and stupidity has changed my mind!"  But that's mean on MY part.  I am not mean at all, and I try to not respond in a mean way - even when I feel like a flippant remark is what I want to do/say.

What I DON'T want to happen is that my little blog is a place of more anger and venom spewed from ... what ends up as pretty close to hate.  I just want others to hear gay people's stories - and to listen to them. 

I realize that your faith is that being gay is wrong.  I had heard that during all the days of my church life, especially since it was a hot-topic since the Pat Robertson days of "AIDS is God's wrath" against homosexuals.  The anti-gay arguments have been used to raise money and spread fear.  Gay people, meanwhile, are just trying to live without being condemned.  They've heard all the "love the sinner, hate the sin" stuff, and they know they are no better or worse than anyone else.  Many have been raised in churches and places of faith, yet even though they adhered to ALL that was required of them, they still were/are not straight.  Your arguments are not going to change them, nor change me from being their ally. 

In addition, I would never want any one of my gay friends to have to read the same old arguments that you (or maybe not you, but others) would put forth.  That is not what my blog is for, and like I have said, I will not allow it. 

Carol Boltz


Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Ray Boltz's new blog

Finally!  Ray Boltz now has his songs "out there"and has made a new entry to his "blog." Ray has put his lyrics plainly visible for nearly all the songs, as well as explanations for several of them.  I think if you take a look, and as you listen, you will be touched.

Update:  If you click on this entry's title, it will take you directly to this URL:

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Some comments are out of line, and I won't publish them

(This post is actually a comment I wrote in response to some (3-4) recent anonymous comments that object to how I defend the rights of gay people.  It is an answer to why I don't publish some comments, and some e-mails just don't get answers.)

I won't publish your comments that criticize gay people because of their sexual orientation.  When you claim that "some of my friends are gay," but you "doubt their "walk with Jesus" " (the commenter's quotes), well, let me share this with you:  If you hold the opinion that they are "openly practicing the homosexual lifestyle," and you don't approve, they don't really think of you as their friend, nor do they like you.

I won't publish the messages that say that gay people must be denied freedom to share their lives with another adult to whom they are emotionally and physically attracted.  When you (anonymous commenters) say that someone is "practicing an open homosexual lifestyle" I know you are drawing lines of rejection, and that you assume that all people who are gay adhere to crazy and irresponsible sex - and that isn't true.

I won't publish comments that assume that molestation is the source of same-sex attraction.  This is not based in fact.

I refuse to publish comments that call gay people sinners in the same way as murderers, pedophiles, rapists, or those in incestuous relationships. 

There are other reasons that I reject comments, but tonight it's late, and this is my short list.