Excuse me, also, queer, freak, homo and many other synonyms. 
               
As people mature, we often learn soon, an expression that become invaluable as we grow in understanding; “Because you can does not mean you should.”  

We can all live in the forest, desert, on top of mountains, we can……and the list goes on.  If we have a “hankering” to do something dangerous, risky, or silly, we have to quickly judge what the consequences can be if we succeed and if we fail.  If we succeed, others might think more or less of us and perhaps expect our one time behaviors to begin to “re-create” us.  Or, if we do bad stupid stuff, people might think we are on drugs or have been covert thieves or rapists or whatever.  EVERYTHING we do has a consequence–sometimes, not more than give us a hangover, stomach ache or it can bring us broke bones and once in a life time, an award.

That is when we try, for us, aberrant behavior.

Now, how do we enter the world of cultural behavior that is not “our normal behavior?”   Such as joining the KKK or a Mosque or becoming a skin head or a vegetarian or whatever?   Each of those people feel they are “right.”  Only psychotics feel anything is acceptable.

Our laws change to adapt to society.  We have real state laws that are a bit different from one state to another state.  We have criminal and tort laws that are a bit different from state to state.  And we have marriage laws that are uniquely different from state to state; in some states, a person cannot marry below the age of 18 without parent’s permission.  In Mississippi, as of 2010, a person can marry at age 15 without parent’s permission.

A few years ago, kids in Utah could marry at age 12 with parent’s permission.  And in California, still, with parent’s and court’s permission, a person can be married at any age–any!!!

So far, there is no law permitting [or prohibiting] people and animals from marrying.  While  jokes go around that many men marry their favorite horse or jackas when they live in West Virginia, a different permission that to most people around the world that is just as freakish and aberrant and whacko is the man or woman who marries someone of their own sex.

Let’s forget the church perspective on this a moment.  Let’s look at all other perspectives that we can discuss with calm, deliberate focus. 

He loves him and she loves her.  I respect that. That is close to being a best buddy or “sis.” And, reasonable people use the phrase, “What they do in their bedroom is their own business.”  I do agree.

What does not make sense is when this cultural aberrant behavior becomes a political thing and when the minority not only “comes out of the closet”
but demands equal rights. 

Let’s skip that a minute. 

Let’s go to biology and let’s go to self-imposed illness. 

Sperm cannot impregnate other sperm.  Ova need sperm; other ova cannot enter ova. Plus, each male is designed not to have 2 heads, not to have 4 arms, or two mouths and in rare cases, they do have 2 heads, 4 arms and both sex organs.  And medical science states immediately that those conditions are aberrant.  It has never happened in the history of the world where anyone wanted 2 heads, 4 of this or to be two people.  We, as humans, easily accept others who have “sexual stuff” like we do to be like who we are, etc.

When we see two girls kiss, we applaud this cause it means she is hot and will likely kiss
a guy early on a date.  She is not considered gay.

When we see two guys kiss, we want to barf.  PERIOD.

Next problem.  Kids and school.  Dad’s day. Mom’s day.  Parent’s day.  The inference is one dad, one mom.  If that inference is too  restrictive, then we can bring in the horse and jackass too.

When kids of all ages get together, they compare.  Having a big sex area is a nothing below the age of 12.  Cause kids do not care.  Kids gain what psychologists call “normal behavior” hints and rules by watching their parents, and neighbors and listening to teachers, and combining the best of all worlds.  In all of history, NOWHERE is gay considered normal.  IT is a fact, granted, that some very known artists, scientists and more, were gay.  But their accomplishments were not broadcast as “Jim, the artist, is gay. Or Francine, the molecular biologist, is gay.  We don’t want to know their sexual orientation, rarely want to know their political orientation–we only want to know how they got to their conclusions that helped the world.

Between 1964-1974, in San Francisco, California, AIDS became a big thing because GAY men were sharing needles or doing other things that can only occur between illegal drug use or sex with a same sex partner.  ONE does not get AIDS by what they eat or drink or sit by.

Move ahead to 2005-2012, gay people not only have come out of their closets, they demand to be seen by others as normal.  They are indifferent to the phenomenal harm they bring to their maturing kids who learn that his-her parents practice abnormal behaviors–while demanding of their children–normal behaviors.  Kids are told not to smoke, use drugs, have pre-marital sex and not to steal, lie, etc.  Yet, some of their parents are choosing to defy 6,000 +years of history and accepted world cultural beliefs, and they demand to be “out of the closet,” practicing homosexuals and and still, those parents demand their children follow the laws of society.  If a man or women seeks sex with underage people, there is no problem with arrest and conviction.  Odd.  A man can have unlimited sex with his 12 year old female wife [is that redundant–not sure?] but he cannot have any sex with the wife’s 12 year old girl friend.  Doesn’t that seem odd?  A gay man can have sex with his partner’s best friends because they are age 18 or over.  And in California, a man with a court’s permission can have a wife at age 12.  So, why can’t that man with a 12 year old wife have sex with his wife’s 12 year old girl friend if the girl friend wants sex with him?  Why not?  Because the best girl friend is under age.  So far, no one has gone to court seeking a removal of the minimum age for sex.  Why not?  If such a law passed anywhere, then that city would become the national headquarters for pedophilia.  Can we assume that would be bad?  But would it be bad if the home has 4 people in it; a gay couple, each aged 18 and a husband age 18 with a wife aged 12.
           
One seems horrendous and the other seems to the gay community to be very normal and acceptable.  All we need is one state with a very liberal, gay governor and gay justices and we will have the minimum age for sex removed. That is all that stands between unlimited legal sex for grammar and high school boys and girls.

NONE of this even considers the idea that as a boy or girl ages while he-she has a relative that is a married gay, the boy or girl will have extreme doubts as to logical things and healthful things…..and reasonable things…..and theft and lying and drugs will seem safe, reasonable and good to use or practice. 

Day by day, different states are “playing” with the mental health of their children.  Just imagine as kids run away from homes because of alcoholism in the family; those same kids do not want to see two daddies in a house that was designed for one.

[by the way, if a gay persons parents' parent's parent, all the way back to Lucy, had chosen  to be gay, the current gay person would not have been alive; someone has to make people.]

Google

Last doodle video image in which you see in the bottom center of the gay couple.

Or roses or chocolates, or gifts. The boy does nothing doodle to win his beloved until he decides to accompany her on her jump rope and so in love. Google celebrates Valentine’s Day with this simple video that moves away from the habitual consumption of the day. But in just 1.15 minutes slides also another message of tolerance. At the end of the story shows a mosaic full of humor with other couples who want: an astronaut with an alien, a princess with a frog, a dog and a cat, a drink with a biscuit, a couple of different race and a homosexual .

It is a second shooting before submitting to the search page of Valentine term, but remains in the retina as an almost subliminal message, as used in television commercials.

Those who have seen the doodle in Spain might not have noticed this detail, but certainly more than one will be surprised to see in Malaysia, Nigeria, Kenya and India, where homosexuality is punishable. Also on page of Google in Chinese from Hong Kong you can see, though not in the official China. In Lebanon, or Turkey, countries with more permissive laws themselves can be seen and also in South Africa, the only African country that has anti-discrimination laws, but not in Morocco.

Because the Internet company has been careful not to add his tribute to Valentine’s Day in most Arab countries reject this conclusion, and where homosexuality is pursued hard, like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, and Pakistan.

The doodle spans virtually the entire European continent, including Russia, but not in Romania, Azerbaijan or Tajikistán.

In America also is distributed unevenly. Located in Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Chile and certainly in America, but no trace in other in which couples exchange gifts such as Costa Rica, Peru, Uruguay, Dominican Republic, Venezuela or Cuba.

Sources point to Google ABC.es that “doodle appears in countries that today is Valentine’s Day, which is not at all” and remember that in Egypt, as in Bolivia, Brazil and Colombia on Valentine’s Day is celebrated in other calendar dates.

If other countries that celebrate Valentine do not include the video is “because they have decided that whether or not that party is very important for your country or have not had direct interest”, say from Google, which added: “It has nothing to do with the doodle content. “

While the Gays and Lesbians community cried foul. It won’t or didn’t hinder people, from addressing negative comments toward homosexual in society. Jews, Blacks, Italians, Asians  talked about like the Muslims daily.

And, yes men states comments probably more concerning gay people in society. In truth, there’s a phase that uses football positions to comment on gays in society. All because of these positions, within the sport.

If you are the quarterback. You should know the reason why? Or, if you are playing center. You can guess, what’s getting touched. Now realize it all depends on the way you take the statement. Simply put. You can become a defensive end and cover your special spot. Or request to be safety to alert people, what you are not?

And, what I describe all concern the way you look, at things. Remember, this is the same sports that have males pretending to be all man. Now to take it further. Notice that baseball operates in similar ways too. You could be the batter. The swinger of things. Which brings us to that one spotlighted position called catcher. Which could take you into another homophobic direction.

Gays, within our society should jump in line. That rather the comment came, from someone famous or simply Jay. Yo won’t stop people from talking about or saying things that seems gay. As people has stated when defining the definition of this word. It stated “happy” or”joyful” which many gays seems not to understand about themselves.

Oh, sure the representatives loves to comment society needs more education to not the negative toward gays. Well, hadn’t people stated this about racists in society. Or uninformed politicians professing facts which isn’t supported by their claims.

Oh, I’ve better stop before I get accused of promoting sports positions, as gay. Remember, it’s just how you see things in general.

Today was no different than any other day. I woke up, and proceeded to do nothing. What is there to even do in Shreveport? Nothing once you hit a certain age because you have done it all.

The only thing to do is think.

The first thing that comes to mind is you. How you have changed since our lips touched. You feel distant, and it is hard to confront you about it because honestly I cannot. There is something in the way, and we both know what that is. Your boyfriend… the one you cheated on with me. We both did not intend to do so, but we both like each other so much that it just kind of happened. I wish you would talk to me. I wish you would tell me what happened. One day you were flirty and now you are nothing but dry in the words you say to me.  Is it the guilt? You have to be guilty because you normally would not do this. You are not that kind of guy that goes around and cheats. I blame myself because I pushed, but at the same time, you had to want to since we kept going. At least we only kissed, but I just wish you would give me something to work with. I am tired of being in the dark, and I hate feeling played.

Let’s hope for the best… Until tomorrow.

But to me youre nothing
Nothing but a user
Boy you have so much to prove
Before you can come near me
You need to hear me
Or you will always lose
No matter how much i care
You have so much to prove

I wish you would begin to see
That in the end its me
A guy that you could trust
Your past holds you back
And now you begin to lack
you shouldve already known
I wont always be here
So now its time you hear
Everything that is wrong
Youre like dope
I keep false hope
You cant give me a reason to stay

So to me youre nothing
Nothing but a user
Boy you have so much to prove
Before you can come near me
You need to hear me
Or you will always lose
No matter how much i care
You have so much to prove

Before you get here youre gone
Youre always running away
you make me feel like im wrong
Like theres no other way
So now ill take a stand and say

Youre nothing to me
Nothing but a user
Boy you have so much to prove
Before you can come near me
You need to hear me
Or you will always lose
No matter how much i care
You have so much to prove

I knew what I had to do.  I had to protect my friend, and I had to do it in a way that the Man-Beast would understand.  I had to pretend to be Nikki’s significant other, and, being the uglier of the two, I had to be the dominant one, the Husband lesbian.  (The Ugly Friends never get to be the Wife lesbian, they always have to be the mister.)  “Listen, you man,” I said with disdain, tightening my grip.  “That’s my baby you’re messing with, and if you touch her one more time, it’s going to be you and me in that back alley, throwing blows.” (Notaro 2002)

Within this joking account, there are many male and female stereotypes that are addressed in reference to lesbian subculture.  Current American thought is aligned with Notaro’s understanding of lesbian relationships in that they mimic heterosexuals ones; “Butch women were thought to be aping men, while femme women were accused of objectifying themselves” (Levitt 2005).  However, lesbian partner roles are inherently different from that of heteronormative roles in a variety of ways including: partner preference, role responsibilities, and sexual encounters.

            In choosing a partner “the implicit expectation was that butch and femme women were attracted to one another (or to women on the other side of the butch-femme continuum)” (Levitt 2005).  While in some cases that might be true, in a study based on personal ads it was found that “butch lesbians’ offers and requests were similar to those of femme lesbians, supporting the suggestion…that butch lesbians’ mate preferences may be more similar to those of femme lesbians than to those of heterosexual men” (Smith 2011).  In the study it was noted that both butch and femme lesbians requested honesty, while heterosexual men and women focused their ads on status measure (education, profession, and monetary standing); “honesty was requested by 34% of butch and 36% of femme lesbians (compared to 20% of heterosexual women and 9% of heterosexual men)” (Smith 2011).   Because lesbian relationships consist of partnership of two women the relationship is predominantly focused on emotion, and will stress the importance of sharing feelings.

            When thinking of male the next assumption is dominant and vice versa females.  The same assumption makes an appearance when thinking of butches and femmes, however the butch’s role is primarily to please their femme.  When interviewed about these obligations one femme says, “It’s sort of like, ‘I’m femme and I have these secret… And maybe, if you’re nice, I’ll tell them to you.  But you have to be nice.  And nice looks like, rub my feet.’” (Levitt 2005).  Comparatively one butch stated, “I’m more aware of letting them go first… I want to do everything… to make them like me… Showing them I like them by respecting them… Complimenting is important too.” (Levitt 2005).  Here the distinction between gender role and power is evident; “a strong feminine woman seems to have a certain power, a certain in-chargeness, that a butch woman doesn’t have” (Levitt 2005).  Heterosexual relationships very rarely emulate this masculine as submissive and feminine as dominant, as well as the male as the pleaser of the female.

            Sexually, yet another difference is determined.  The fact that women know their own anatomy is one of the largest of them:

The higher frequency of orgasm in the homosexual contacts may have depended in part upon the considerable psychologic stimulation provided by such relationships, but there is reason for believing that it may also have depended on the fact that two individuals of the same sex are likely to understand the anatomy and the physiologic responses and psychology of their own sex better than they understand that of the opposite sex.  Most males are likely to approach females as they, the males, would like to be approached by a sexual partner.  They are likely to begin by providing immediate genital stimulation.  They are inclined to utilize a variety of psychologic stimuli which may mean little to most females. (Kinsey 1953)

Kinsey then goes on to say the same for females.  However, the physical aspect of sexual intercourse is not the only difference.  Again, roles are very important in displaying the difference between lesbian and heterosexual relationship; dominance plays a key part in the role reversal.  Unlike their hetero female counterparts, lesbian “femme participants emphasized that this femininity did not connote passivity” (Levitt 2005).  Femmes get pleasure from topping, or taking charge, of their butch and without that distinction in gender power, femmes found that they actually lost the pleasure of being in control (Levitt 2005).  In heteronormative couples, it is standard for the male to top, and take less emotional care of his submissive female.

            Ultimately “female masculinity is not an imitation of male masculinity [nor is femme an imitation of female femininity], rather than it is a specific gender with it’s own rich cultural history” (Smith 2011).  Assimilation fails to account for intersectionality; gender, sex, and identity are all very different aspects of a person/relationship.  When we take intersectionality of these aspects into account, we stop using mainstream binaries and realize the infinite possibilities that exist in all different relationships.  Thus, heterosexual and butch and femme relationships exist in entirely different cultures.

Works Cited

Gibson, M., & Meem, D. (2002). Femme/Butch: New Considerations of The Way We Want To                    Go. New York: Harrington Park Press.

Kinsey, A. (1953). Sexual Behavior In The Human Female. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders                          Company.

Levitt, H. M., & Hiestand, K. R. (2005). Gender Within Lesiban Sexuality: Butch and Femme                  Perspectives. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18(1), 39-51.       Retrieved from                        EBSCOhost.

Notaro, L. (2002). The Idiot Girl’s Action Adventure Club. New York: Random House.

Smith, C., Konik, J., & Tuve, M. (2011). In Search of Looks, Status, or Something Else?                           Partner Preferences Among Butch and Femme Lesbians and Heterosexual Men and              Women. Sex Roles, 64(9/10), 658-668. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.[*]

[*] The Smith article includes personal interviews as well as research, so it is used as both a primary and secondary source of information in this essay.

Swinscow was clearly nervous and evasive in his answers but vehemently denied any involvement in the theft. It was only under repeated questioning and when it appeared that he was going to be charged with the crime that he at last owned up to where the money had come from. He had made the money working as a prostitute, he said. He named Charles Hammond as his employer and told the Police that he ran a male brothel at 19 Cleveland Street in plush Fitzrovia. He elaborated that he had been encouraged to work as a prostitute by Charles Newlove, an eighteen year old post office clerk, and that two other telegraph boys, George Alma Wright and Charles Ernest Thickbroom, also worked there.

Homosexual encounters between men, consenting or not, in private or not, had been made outlawed in the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885. The case was handed to Detective-Inspector Frederick Abberline, who had been prominent in the Jack the Ripper investigation the previous year.

On 6 July, Frederick Abberline visited the premises at Cleveland Street with a warrant for the arrest of Charles Hammond and Charles Newlove.  He found that the premises had been locked and two men gone. Newlove was later arrested at his mother’s house in Camden Town whilst Hammond was staying with his brother in Gravesend.

Further investigations uncovered the brothels client list and the high-level profile of many of its customers. These included Lord Arthur Somerset and Henry Fitzroy, Earl of Euston. Lord Somerset was an equerry to the Prince of Wales, and it was soon being rumoured that Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence, the eldest son of the Prince of Wales and the presumptive heir to the throne had also been a frequent visitor. The British press played down these rumours but they would not go away.

That Prince Albert Victor was an unusual character, there seems little doubt. Some describe him as other-worldly, others as having a child-like mien. It would certainly appear that he enjoyed the seamier side of life. Letters would later emerge that appeared to show that he was being blackmailed by two female prostitutes. He was also later to be implicated in the Jack the Ripper murders. But for all the rumours and all the gossip there is little firm evidence for any of this. He died on 14 January, 1892, aged 28 during the great flu pandemic. Though he had earlier been diagnosed with venereal disease.

On 19 August, an arrest warrant was issued in the name of George Veck, an associate of Charles Hammond, who had been fired from his position at the Central Telegraph Office for improper conduct with the boys. He now often posed as a clergyman to lure young boys to the house in Cleveland Street. He was arrested on his return to Portsmouth from the Continent where found on his person were letters that implicated a man by the name of Algernon Allies. He was to admit, under questioning, to having received money from Lord Somerset for sex and of having had an on-going sexual relationship with him. Lord Somerset was called in for questioning for a second time. Upon his release he fled abroad.

On 11 September, Newlove and Veck went on trial charged with offences of gross indecency. Their Defence was led by Lord Somerset’s solicitor Arthur Newton who again brought up the rumours regarding the Duke of Clarence. Many years after the scandal people who knew the Duke were willing to testify that he did indeed frequent male brothels.

The events surrounding the Cleveland Street Scandal were  now beginning to be reported in the daily press. The Prince of Wales now intervened to ensure that the rumours surrounding his son went no further, and the trial moved quickly to a conclusion. Both Newlove and Veck were given light sentences of 9 and 4 months hard labour respectively after pleading guilty to charges of gross indecency. It appeared that Newton’s threats had worked.

Lord Somerset, who was once again back in England, was advised by Newton that the threat of arrest was a real one and that he should return to the Continent immediately. The Prime Minister Lord Salisbury now intervened to ensure that no extradition warrant was issued. Likewise, the case against Charles Hammond was quietly dropped.

Lord Somerset later returned to England to attend his mother’s funeral. On hearing of this the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, James Monro, insisted that an arrest warrant be issued; but the Lord Chancellor, Lord Halsbury blocked any such attempt.  It seems odd that such lengths were gone to to protect one errant aristocrat unless it was feared that further investigations would implicate others.

The Government was coming under increasing pressure to act, however. Lord Somerset was warned, perhaps by the Prime Minister himself, and by the time an arrest warrant was issued on 12 November, Somerset was again safely abroad.

The mainstream press had remained deferential in their reporting of the scandal , and it was down to the Editor of the radical weekly journal The North London Press, Ernest Parke, to delve further. He suggested that the Cleveland Street Brothel was run specifically for the benefit of the ruling elite to pursue their personal perversions whilst pretending to maintain the highest moral standards at home. He questioned the lenient sentences passed on Newlove and Veck, why the case against Hammond had been dropped, and why none of the clients of the brothel had been prosecuted even though there names were known to the police. At first, Parke refused to name names but finally pointed the finger at Henry Fitzroy, Earl of Euston. Fitzroy immediately brought a case of libel against Parke. He admitted that he had indeed visited the brothel but only once, and upon seeing for himself what was going on and the den of iniquity it was,  left never to return. Parke was found guilty on 16 January, 1890, and sentenced to 12 months in prison.

In Parliament, Henry Labouchere, the Liberal MP whose amendment to the Criminal Law Amendment Act had outlawed same sex encounters between men, accused the Government and the Prime Minister Lord Salsibury of a cover up. He was forced to withdraw the accusation. 

Any fall-out from the Cleveland Street Scandal was successfully suppressed by the Authorities, but it was to re-emerge during the trial of Oscar Wilde five years later. Reinforcing the view prevalent at the time that homosexuality, or sodomy,  was an aristocratic vice used to corrupt lower-class youths.  

The gay community has long prided itself on its ideals of peace, love and unity.  One of the main arguments of the gay community is that they are heavily discriminated against for their sexual orientation, which is true, and that all they want is for others respect their lifestyle choices and respect them as fellow human beings.  This is a basic right that every one of us is entitled to as a member of the human race.  One cannot but admire members of the gay community for standing up for their rights as human beings, and promoting tolerance and freedom from prejudice.

Parallel to this, there is an increasingly heated battle being waged in relation to the presence of homosexuals in the military.  Most conservatives would prefer to continue with the policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in which members of the army that are gay must stay in the closet during the time of service.  Recently, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was repealed amid much controversy and bickering across party lines.

However, lost in all this political and social rhetoric is the fact that the very notion of gays in the military defies all conventional logic.  Think about it.  Here is a community of people that pride themselves on being peaceful, loving individuals.  The rainbow flag that characterizes the gay movement is sometimes used to symbolize other pacifist movements as well.  And yet, a good percentage of them voluntarily enlist in an organization whose mandate run completely counter to these ideals.

All divisions of the armed forces, whether they be the marines, the air force, or the navy, have one main purpose for existing: to find and kill the enemy.  Simple as that.  In carrying out this mandate, the military forces of all countries in the world have been known to commit gross human rights abuses.  Hundreds and thousands of innocent civilians die at the hands of the military every year.  The military is one the greatest violators of human rights in the history of mankind.

So why would members of a pacifist movement such as the gay community want to be even remotely associated with such a barbaric organization?  Are these people confused about where their own personal beliefs lie?  Only they can give us some kind of an answer and attempt to explain their reasoning.

This article is sponsored by Free Laptops 4 All

According to research by experts, although in every person there is an element of womanhood and manhood, it is not true it can cause homosexuality.
they think the main factor causing the patient to homosexuality is the result of social factors that influence a person’s education and relationships in childhood. in other words,

it is an abnormality in the development of personality.

Homosexual conduct is harmful to human body. people who do this are very vulnerable to contracting sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS. various scientific studies say that homosexuality is a major source of sexually transmitted diseases. then try to always avoid those stricken with this disease.

Homosexuals also endanger one’s soul, the soul tossing in a person because he has sometimes caused the disease. it is also because he felt that the desired organs were women but in reality he is a man. anxiety that makes the loss of identity. and felt ostracized in society.

 There is a dear couple in my church who I’ve always felt completely comfortable with, we’ve served together in various ways, and though we don’t spend a great deal of time together, the fellowship with this family is one of the most real I’ve ever encountered through the pane of glass we call the closet.

 I’ve always known they were one of the first people I wanted to come out too, but life gets in the way and I’ve just never gotten around to it.  They are Christ followers of a good report, gentle, extremely understanding and totally wise.  A perfect combination for someone needing to talk about something as big and controversial an issue as this.

  So I set up a meeting with them at a coffee house, something else we have in common that proves we have a real connection; Coffee.

 From their very first response to my desire to get together to discuss my “Very private and confidential situation” as I stated it, they were so glad I would even consider them, going so far as to say they were honored that I would confide in them.

 Upon meeting them, there was not a single nerve on edge; it was like I was going to see friends who had known forever. We did not dive straight into the issues, but just had casual and fun conversation over coffee leading up to the issue at hand. Even from this point I could tell they were going to be ok with me no matter what I told them.

  So, the conversation reached that point where we had talked long enough about life in general, and it was time to get down to business, so I started with appreciation for their willingness to meet me.

 I recounted the basics of my life in the Church we attended and my love for the people there, my faithful service in all areas of said Church, and how much I loved it.  Then I expressed that a part of my life that had always been there was beginning to be at odds with the picture cut out for my life by both the Church and my family, and that part of my life was that I was gay and always have been.

 Immediately, they said “OK” absorbing the shock in love so strong I could feel, they didn’t say much as I began to present the rest of my story, but they didn’t have to. The way they looked at me, nodded their heads, and overall body language comforted me like I could not believe.  This was going to be awesome.

I explained what must feel like a broken record to anyone following my articles,  that being gay was not always about sex,  (thought it can be if you choose so) and so much more about being a part of me, deeply rooted and as natural as their heterosexuality.  They nodded in agreement, and I continued.

Expressing my desire to continue to live strong in my faith and love for Jesus Christ, I wanted to come out in a humble way, where I was honest with my loved ones and church family.  I wanted to live by the morals and standards of biblical doctrine, and even though I was gay, did not mean I would violate those morals.  They continued to nod in agreement!

We talked a lot about everything I’ve been discussing here, so I won’t go into detail yet again on my beliefs, but let me just say that these two people accepted me for what I presented. They understood what I was choosing as a gay person, and that it was good in the eyes of God.   They even reacted well when I stated that if God brought me a man as a companion, someone who complimented me and we edified each other in Christ, I would not refuse that relationship.  Even on this point they nodded in agreement that it could be possible, if lead by God, and acknowledged that it was a true and good desire for me to have.

 From their they offered their advice and help in the most loving and affirming ways, from how to come out to my family and present myself in the most nonthreatening and non-challenging ways, how to give them every opportunity to try to understand, to at least understand that I needed them to try!

 They listened to me, and actually heard the ideas and desires of my hearts, they did not reinterpret based on their current understanding of homosexuality, and they didn’t assume I was sexually active or desiring to destroy marriage, family, and/or America.

  After they spent some time comforting me knowing the challenges and rejection that would most likely follow from those closest to me, they assured me that no matter what happened, they would be a part of that network of believers who would be there for fellowship and ministry, so that I would have church of friends to be a part of, even if I can’t find a church building to worship in.

 I tell you, I have never felt freer then I did that night after exchanging hugs and phone numbers before parting company.  Love is a powerful thing; nothing can stand against it when applied through Christ!

 Fast forward 18 hours later into my second meeting with the councilor, and the story becomes exactly the opposite.  If you remember, I arranged this secondary meeting to address everything that bothered me in the first one; Condemnation of my “Lifestyle Choice,” My three month challenge of reading only his view material and no contact with gay people or affirming ministries.

  Every detail in the first meeting bothered me in my spirit; everything seemed wrong and inappropriate for my situation.  I prayed over it, and felt this was not a place God was leading me into, it was a place God had already brought me through, and was moving me forward, not backwards.

 I expressed all these things and humbly and respectfully as I could, but this time making sure he at least heard my thoughts entirely before shutting me down and making suggestions.  He let me have the authority this time, but that does not mean he was any more cooperative.

  First to counter my argument, he decided and equated my decision to tell people I was gay, as the worst form of sexual sin.  That by announcing my sexuality, I would be stepping down into a pit of destruction that God would give me over to “that lifestyle.”

 Then he took my decline of the challenge as giving up because it got too hard, or too convicting.  He didn’t hear a thing I said about being in serious prayer over it, about how I felt convicted NOT to do it.  He disregarded anything I experienced with God as foolishness.  “You could not even last a week in the Truth!” he said.

 Next, he told me why I was gay.  This is the argument that assured me he really has no idea what he was talking about,  he possess a very limited and bad understanding of what it means to be gay.  Now, in my life I’m known for being meek, kind, and creative.  I like to cook and bake as well, almost as much as I like to eat the food I make.

 If you have qualities like me, lo and behold, according to my councilor this is why you’re gay:

“You grew up with certain feminine qualities… I’m not calling you feminine mind you, but you have several things that the world labels gay. You are meek, passive, very kind, creative and decorative, and you like to bake things.  So, as you grew up, you bought into the world’s idea that you’re gay because you possess these “gay” qualities.”

 Great!  I had never ever considered any of these things to be gay; actually most of those characteristics about me are reinforced by men in my life or men I look up too. My father is the meekest gentlest person, yet he is known for being one of the manliest men, and that’s exactly how I’ve always viewed him.   And being kind? When was being kind gay? Last time I checked we are all called to be kind no matter what!  Lastly, my cooking and baking talents and interests stems mostly from men I’ve seen cook and bake on TV, famous chefs and extreme cake decorators, all straight males (as far as I know anyways.)

 So know that we know why we are gay, again according to my councilor here is how we fix it:

“All you have to do is accept that you’re different in these qualities, and be ok with it. It’s ok for you to be these things, and be straight.  You will find all your freedom in doing that.”

 There you have it, all we have to do is accept we are different, instead of accepting ourselves as gay.  The funny thing about doing that however; is that accepting that I like to cook and be nice to others does not make my attraction to men go away, nor does being ok with the fact that I am meek and have mad baking skills, this will never take away the natural desire I have for a man to fill my needs like only the opposite sex can in a heterosexual. 

 The next part of the conversation is what bothered me the most, and pretty much sealed the deal that I would not be coming back to him any longer.

 There are very few people I’ve confided in locally that know of my sexuality, those who do know hold that information in the strictest of confidence.  So the councilor suggests to me that I should tell my family as soon as possible before they find out from someone else of my lifestyle choices.  Again making it sound like I was living a secret sinful life that if exposed would showcase sexual perversion and activity.

 I explain that those who know are safe with the information, but then he leans in with a smirk that set me on edge.  “Well whoever you’ve told has already been telling other people. Your family will find out sooner rather than later.”  At this point I felt threatened, and though I could never prove that he was threating me with leaking the information, I am certain that he was at the very least, trying to scare me into repentance.  That somehow if I knew rumors were flying about me, I would fall to my knees in front of my family in guilt and shame, begging for them to forgive my awful lifestyle choices.

  I thought for a moment and spoke truthfully, “If there really are words going around about me, I would hope that my family and friends, as well as the Church would view those rumors through the lens of my character and integrity. If they can’t then it does not matter if I tell them or someone else does, they will think what they think.

 At this point, giving up reclaiming me for Christ, he sat back and brought the meeting to a close, acknowledging our obvious disagreement, and stating that there was no grounds for agreeing to disagree, I was wrong he was right.

 Before I left, he made sure to tell me “I’m so grieved in my spirit for you.  God was going to do some awesome and great things for you, and now you’re going to miss out on all of it.  Instead you’re going to be a great disappointment to your family, causing them un-needed pain and shame, you’re going to lose the chance to ever have a family, to have a wife, to have a ministry and all your integrity will be shot to pieces.  God had great plans for you… but not anymore.”

 On that note, he prayed for me, a very “Convict this man of his ways” type of prayer, and we shook hands and then I left.

   I sit here under the stars, finishing me tea, watching my new dog that is now playing with a moth, reflecting on both meetings.  Which one do you think was fueled by the love of Christ?