Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Shawn Trivette
Subject: Questions and comments
To: ghf-info@godhatesfags.com
I've been reading through your page and giving a good deal of thought to what you have to say. To be perfectly honest, I disagree with a lot of what you say, but I don't do so blindly, there is reason. I know that you get a lot of email every day, but I'm hoping you will still read my email and at least seriously consider what I have to say, even if you don't respond (though I would love to have a responce from you).
First off, I think that a clarification of definitions is needed. Neither of us will ever be able to see eye to eye if we don't work from the same set of definitions; communication will fail. The impression that I get from your webpage is that you define gay people to be those that have sex with members of their same gender. Though this can be a valid definition, it is still ambiguous and leaves out certain people. I define being gay as someone who is attracted to members of their own gender, whether or not they have sex. This is the definition I will use throughout this email when I use the term gay, homosexual, or any other related word. If at any time I am referring only to same gender sexual activity, I will specify so.
With this definition in place, let me next continue with this statement. I am gay. However, I am at the same time a virgin, which basically means that I don't fall under your implied definition. What does this mean? It means I am attracted to other men, not women. At the same time, I am a Christian. I know at this point you are probably thinking that I am decieving myself or that this is can't be true, something is wrong, or any number of things. However, I know that I am a Christian becuase I know that I have (and still do regularly) experienced God and His love in my life. To deny that I am a Christian is to deny my experiences that I know I have had. I do not assume to deny your experience with God, please return the favor and do not deny me mine.
I would like to make some comments on certain things that you have said in your site. From your main page, I'm pulling the following excerpts (I would list the whole thing, but it is long, and I don't have something to say to everything) with my own comments. You claim that gay people are:
"violent and doom nations (Gen. 19:1-25; Jgs. 19)"
How do you come to this? I am gay, but I am not a violent person. Actually, I rather dislike violence.
"are workers of iniquity and hated by God (Psa. 5:5)"
I disagree. I know that God loves me. I know this because of direct experience. I have experienced God's love in my life and I still do day after day.
"are filthy and lawless (2 Pet. 2:7,8)"
I am a rather clean person and like to keep myself so. Physically and spiritually. And I very much believe that laws are in place for a reason.
"have wholly given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh (Jude 7)"
This is very not true of me. I have never had sex and have no intention of doing so any time in the near future. I'm not even dating, and I'm not into "free love" or anything like that. And unless you count eating meat as "going after flesh", I've never gone after any flesh, strange or normal (however you define that).
"and have no hope of Heaven unless they repent (Rev. 22:15)"
Repent of what? A natural feeling?
But those aren't the only points on your page that I felt were innacurately used. There are several others that are innacurately used or innacurately stated (or just plain invalid information).
"Fags can be heard chanting "TEN PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH, RECRUIT, RECRUIT, RECRUIT" in their fag parades."
Though I've never used this phrase, I know people who have and in every case I've heard it, they've been joking (basically making fun of the people who honestly think gay people do recruit). In all honesty, on the recruiting issue, I'm sure it is entirely possible that some poeple do try to "recruit" others to be gay. But I have no idea how they intend to accomplish this. You can't make anyone like people of their own gender if their natural tendancy is to like people of their opposite gender. The reverse of this statement is also true. Yes, change is possible (though in a very select few people, it would seem), but it cannot be forced.
"Part of the fag agenda is to turn people from Christianity"
Well, first off, I don't believe there is a "fag agenda" as you put it. Though, just about anything can exist, I guess....Anyway, my point here is that it is an unfair statement to say that gay people are trying to turn people from Christianity. As I said before, I very much support Christianity (being a Christian myself). Yes, some gay people are trying to turn people from Christ, but a lot of straight people are, too. It's unfair to make such a broad generalization and yet at the same time limit it to just one specialized group.
"A phrase that has come up recently in this earth is "sexual orientation."...The purpose of the phrase is to take the spotlight from what these perverts do, and put it on the notion that they are just poor, mistreated people, who simply are attracted to members of the same sex - as if they aren't engaging in activity forbidden by God Almighty."
Here is where you have not done serious research in the subject. Sexual orientation is defined as one's attraction to a particular gender. This does not cover sex. Not all gay people are actively engaging in sex, or any related activity even. Please stop assuming that all gay people were cast in the same mold. We are not. We are all different, just like all straight people are different. Yes, some gays are out just to have sex. But for a great many more of us, sex is really not that important. There is more to who we are than just who we're attracted to.
"We use the word "fag" as a contraction of the word "faggot" or "fagot." A "fag" is a firebrand."
I understand your reasoning here, but let me suggest an alternative. Whether you are trying to engage in hurtful namecalling or not is beside the issue. I believe that you are not using the term "fag" as a means of hate, I believe as well that you do not hate us. You say so yourselves, and if one can't be taken on their word, what can they be taken on? Nonetheless, if you are trying to spread your message of truth and you truly want to reach other people, then would it not make more sense to use some terms that would not turn them away? I am not suggesting that you alter what you pecieve to be the truth. You should have a right to speak your mind and express your ideas, just like any of us should. And if you want to use the word fag, that's your choice as well. But if your goal is to reach others with this message, fag is only going to turn a lot of them away and they won't listen. Perhaps using a less loaded word (yes, a more P.C. word) would get a few more people to listen a little better.
"The only true Nazis in this world are fags. They want to force you by law to support their filth, and they want to shut you up by law when they hate what you say."
Well, I can't speak for everyone, but really don't most people want to shut others up when they hate what others say? I disagree with what you are preaching, however, I believe in your right to say and believe it. At the same time, I expect that you will return such beliefs, and allow me the freedom to believe and say what I wish. It's a two way street.
The last point I want to make does not concern a quote (at least not one I've found) on your page. The general impression I get is that you would like to have your way of believing in God to be everyone's way of believing in God. You believe that your way is the true and proper way and others are wrong. Again, while I do not and will not attempt to deny your belief in God and the way that you believe He has instructed us, I do believe that you are wrong in trying to impose this on others. America was founded on the principals of religious freedom. If your beliefs exclude homosexuals, you are entitled to that belief. However, if my beliefs say that God loves even gay people, then that has to be respected as well. This is not to say that we should just carelessly throw out "religious" ideas and expect them to be tolerated (if someone's religion supports sacrificing children, this would be a bit excessive of the freedom of religion idea), but there are many faiths in the world, in the country alone, and it is not right for anyone to try to force them to believe another way or force them into silence.
Well, I know this has been long, and one of your requirements for a responce in emails is that they were to the point. I think I have been to the point, but I have had many points to make. If this is too long for you to respond to, then I guess that's the way it is. That would be unfortunate, as I would enjoy hearing what you have to say to my comments and ideas. I would hope, though, that if you do respond, you can maintain at least as much respect for me as I have tried to maintain for you. If we can respectfully share our ideas with each other, perhaps we both have an opportunity to learn and grow.
Sincerely,
Shawn Trivette
sage_jock@yahoo.com