48 thoughts on “Joe Dallas on Christian love for gays”

  1. XatWar,

    Welcome to the discussion.

    I disagree with your assumptions about “any religion”. Currently the United Methodists here in California have issued statements in support of marriage between same sex couples, along with a large number of other mainline Christian churches. And the United Church of Christ along with the Unitarian Universalist, Quakers, and both Reform and Reconstructionist Jews are supportive of gays and lesbians Nationwide.

    But I do agree that if we wish to witness to individuals and convince them that our understanding of Scripture reflects the will of God, it is best not to do so by calling them names.

  2. I came to this blog being referred by Americans for Truth. I am not sure what the problem is but I agree with Throckmorton on this one.

    I do not believe homosexual behavior is taught by any religion but I do not see how homosexuals could feel any kind of love from Rep Kern when she said they were worse than terrorists and like cancers.

  3. Just to be fair, Joe Dallas didn’t just lead a “promiscous” gay lifestyle. It seems he led a bisexual one, too. I suppose it’s sort of like Randy Thomas of EXODUS calling himself a “former homosexual” even though he says he meets the “secular definition of bisexual” — and continues to have “lustful” feelings for both men and women.

    When it comes to the issue of “change”, bisexuality is often overlooked, but Joe Dallas talks about it in one of his earliest personal testimonies — which I still have. He decribes going back and forth between sexual relationships with both men and women.

    When Joan Rivers challenged him about this, and asked him about his printed testimony, Joe became very defensive and evasive. Even though he readily agreed to talk about “change” on her show and flew all the way to New York to share it, he said he “made it a habit not to discuss his personal life”. Too late –she already had it in his own words.

    When pressed on the “change” issue, Joe told Joan that “it’s not a complete change from one end of the spectrum to the other — we are all both”. He should speak for himself. But, be that as it may, God loves ex-gay bisexuals, too.

  4. Timothy,

    Good we agree. Now let us try to practice this for those that we do not see eye to eye with. Love your enemy because they reflect something very important in yourself that you may not recognize.

  5. concerned,

    Your comment contains some great truths:

    The world will not become a more peaceful place by having one group trying to out compete or out condem the other.

    and

    Love your neighbor as yourself does not mean shove your believe upon your neighbor

    and even

    There are some very prominent religious and spiritual leaders who try to teach the rest of us the way, but generally those whose pride has inflated their ego to a level of them doing no wrong are unable to listen to the message of these leaders and often put them down or use sarcasm and ridicule to try to shut down there message of peace and goodwill.

    I’m glad we are in agreement on these points

  6. Timothy:

    If you run across a “love them gays” statement that doesn’t come with an accompanying “hate the sin” or “promiscuous lifestyle” or “tell the truth in love” comment, I’m open to hearing it.

    Mary:

    Love gays

    THERE’S ONE!!!

    🙂

  7. Timothy,

    Do you have any idea what sin is? We all miss the mark in one way or the other because there is no one alive today that can measure up to the love that Christ showed the world. There are some very prominent religious and spiritual leaders who try to teach the rest of us the way, but generally those whose pride has inflated their ego to a level of them doing no wrong are unable to listen to the message of these leaders and often put them down or use sarcasm and ridicule to try to shut down there message of peace and goodwill. The world will not become a more peaceful place by having one group trying to out compete or out condem the other. The world will also become less tolerant rather than more tolerant if religion is remove from the picture (we have many historical examples of this) and yet this is what many so called New Age Enlightened people seem to be attempting these days.

    Love your neighbor as yourself does not mean shove your believe upon your neighbor, but rather try to see where the other is coming from. Surrender your will for your own rights and try to understand where your enemy may be coming from. Try it sometime you will be extremely surprised to find that you are really not that much different.

  8. Yikes.

    Well the offer still stands. If you run across a “love them gays” statement that doesn’t come with an accompanying “hate the sin” or “promiscuous lifestyle” or “tell the truth in love” comment, I’m open to hearing it.

    The closest I’ve found recently come’s from Dan Yeary, Sen. McCain’s pastor:

    The 69-year-old Yeary adheres to the Southern Baptist belief that gay marriage and homosexual relations go against Biblical scripture, hot-button issues for many in the United States.

    “The Bible is pretty clear about it, in my opinion it specifically calls it a sin. I also am a sinner and you are a sinner. … Did Jesus Christ love homosexuals? I’m sure he did,” Yeary said.

    Yeah he had to make the “sin” comments but at least he put them after the “but” rather than before. He left the reader with the love message rather than the sin message.

  9. Timothy–

    That part I can understand. Any time I didn’t have control over the advertising or media, they’d always manage to twist something somehow in the end. I grew comfortable just writing my own stuff because at least I knew that the final output was my words and I could answer to them–for good or for bad.

    (One radio station ‘dramatized’ my testimony and, even though, they had talked to me in person on the phone, they gave my character a lisp and affectations that would have made Just Jack seem straight.)

  10. Eddy,

    Actually, if you want to be all technical, the phrase I objected to (or laughed at really) was the words of Lillian Kwon, not Joe Dallas.

    In 94363 I never criticized Dallas at all. If you go back and read it you’ll see that I was pointing out how – yet again – that lovely message of love that anti-gays are so very proud to proclaim was tarnished by being coupled with condemnation and stereotyping.

    The story was always about the global message. This isn’t something jayhuck made up.

    And it’s real. Ironically, its exactly what Dallas was talking about. He was saying, in essense, “be nice” but Kwon couldn’t put those words down without making sure that she also was condemning.

    Perhaps an easier comparison to understand would be

    “Don’t refer to Timothy as a stupid ugly idiot”, said jayhuck when talking about Timothy, the stupid ugly idiot.

    Kwon was doing exactly the opposite of what Dallas was advising.

    And Kwon is far from alone. As i stated (and I know that you know its true), conservatives can’t talk about loving gays without also talking about condemnation. And if they can’t love without condemnation, they might as well not bother. It only make themself feel good and leaves gays thinking that all christians are a bunch of self-righteous hypocrits (which isn’t true, by the way).

    Oh, and if you have some personal issue with me not answering some comment in some thread somewhere that I don’t have the faintest idea about, well I’m sorry. If I made you feel unimportant or diminished in any way, I apologize. That wasn’t my intent.

  11. Jayhuck–

    You’ll have your take; I’ll have mine. But the whole blogging world will confirm that you and I cannot engage in productive converstation. Goodbye!

  12. The problem and issue is BIGGER than Joe Dallas – it includes Joe Dallas of course, but its much bigger than that – I was really hoping you might catch that – regardless of your strict focus only on what Joe Dallas said.

  13. No Eddy you didn’t – I made that suggestion. I was hoping you might understand why Timothy might be responding the way he was – why anyone who has listened to Evangelicals rhetoric against gay people for the last 30 years might have taken exception with what Joe Dallas said – but you didn’t.

  14. No, Jayhuck, I kept going back to one and only one point: Timothy’s characterization of Joe Dallas’ statement that had the word. I never left the room. I didn’t make one suggestion about what ‘gays in general’ thought or might think, I was speaking to Timothy re Timothy’s statement. I spoke to the part of Timothy’s conclusion that I found flawed and that’s when you joined in and shifted the talk to global Evangelical bashing again. Hey, it’s a great topic. I’ve verbally bashed a few in my day too. I guess I just didn’t realize that you intended to ignore discussing the plausibility of my theory while you reiterated your theory no less than half a dozen times.

  15. Timothy–

    I honestly took no objection whatsoever to the statement that was supposed to rile me up. I thought the Christo-fascist might have some good cautionary things to say that the whole church could learn from.

    No can do on the homework assignment. You and I will need considerable trust rebuilding before I’m willing jump through any hoops for you. You walked out of two conversations here that I was a part of; you ignored several honest questions and several thoughtful responses. (Silly me, I actually thought you’d come back and apologize but you obviously felt totally justified in your behavior.)

    Besides I’m busy reviewing YouTube videos that I stumbled on through the link on Warren’s most recent thread.

  16. you seemed intent above on being somewhat dismissive of gay people taking exception to what Joe Dallas said – at least that’s what I heard when I read this:

    What I said above is true. Back when we first started speaking publicly and would naively say that we ‘left the gay lifestyle’, the gay church folks were quick to correct us that we were talking about a promiscuous lifestyle that we led, and that we weren’t being fair to those gay people who had no part in it. So we began accommodating our speech.

    What I was trying to say was that gay people have good reason to be skeptical and suspicious about what Joe Dallas is saying because of what so MANY other Evangelicals and anti-gay organizations have done with these two words. There is no way I can know for certain why Joe Dallas said what he did, but I do have my own opinions and they’ve been formed from visiting his web site? Have I somehow JUDGED him? Not anymore so than you have judged me.

  17. My point wasn’t to talk specifically about Joe Dallas, but to try and help you understand why gay people would be upset and not just a little suspicious hearing YET ANOTHER Evangelical voice using the words promiscuous and gay together.

  18. Timothy’s references were to Joe Dallas’ statement and his use of ‘promiscuity’. He then used that as his premise for the assertion that you’ve been echoing that ‘this is what those Evangelicals do’. Timothy suggested an underhanded motive to the coupling of these words and then you posted several statements saying the same thing. Even when I brought the conversation specifically back to Joe Dallas’ statement, you continued to speak about those Evangelical motives. Simple logic: if I’m clearly talking Joe Dallas and you continually answer speaking of ‘those Evangelicals’, you’re either not really speaking to me (even though you appear to be) or you have already judged him and you’re not being honest with either or both: yourself or us.

  19. And my point is: If Joe Dallas is saying that he used to be promiscuous–and you choose to take it personally–it’s your issue.

    Let me respond with a comparable example:

    “We need to try and understand conservative Christians”, said Timothy Kincaid who used to be a radical Christo-fascist.

    The intent is to tar all conservative Christians as radical Christo-fascists. It’s not accidental word choice. It’s intended to make clear that as much as we need to understand and respect them, we condemn them and find them dispicable.

    Do you get what I’m saying yet?

    There was no reason for that clarifier in that particular paragraph other than to make sure that anyone reading (anti-gays mostly) would know that the author wasn’t saying that love comes without condemnation.

    This isn’t rocket science, Eddy.

    I have a challenge for you.

    Find me – somewhere, any where – either from a conservative speaker or in Christian media where any conservative says that we should love gay people without also making sure that he condemned homosexuality or activists or something. Show me where love stands on its own.

    Warning, this isn’t going to be easy.

    But if you try, you might understand my point. You might even begin to agree with me.

    That’s what was so very very refreshing about Wendy Gritter. She didn’t find it necessary to add that all important “but” after the love statement.

  20. Ah, but in your second, somewhat similar post, you say “It’s not just Joe Dallas…I’ve heard other antigay groups/individuals…”.

    Linquistically, that word ‘other’ is linked to “Joe Dallas” more than his supposed link of ‘all gays’ to ‘promiscuity’.

  21. As I said above, I don’t know why Joe Dallas said it – it may very well have been an innocent descriptor – HOWEVER, the fact still remains that Evangelicals and other anti-gay organizations and individuals DO use the words together to undermine the gay community – so is it really so surprising that members of the gay community would react to similar speech from a similar individual – innocent or not – in a negative way????

  22. And let’s count you, now, too. And you’ve got ’em even closer together! Only the word ‘and’ separates them.

    But my point was “Why did Joe Dallas do it?” But we don’t need to ask him because the all-wise, all-knowing judges have already weighed in.

  23. Its not just Joe Dallas and other ex-gay people that use the words gay and promiscuous in the same sentence – I’ve heard several other anti-gay rights groups/individuals use the same sort of language to advocate against equal rights and treatment for gay people, or to undermine public sympathy for gay people.

  24. I’m not sure about Joe Dallas, but when it comes to Evangelicals, there have been TOO many instances where the words gay and promiscuous are used in the same sentence. Why is that the case?? Are Evangelicals trying to make some point?

  25. And my point is: If Joe Dallas is saying that he used to be promiscuous–and you choose to take it personally–it’s your issue.

    What I said above is true. Back when we first started speaking publicly and would naively say that we ‘left the gay lifestyle’, the gay church folks were quick to correct us that we were talking about a promiscuous lifestyle that we led, and that we weren’t being fair to those gay people who had no part in it. So we began accommodating our speech.

  26. To clarify, my point is this:

    If you want to convince gay people that you really want to show love, try not insulting them in the very same sentence.

    Now what was your point?

    Is it that you have to insult gay people or they may think that you aren’t talking about them?

  27. What would be a TRUE blessing to see, is to have Evangelicals treat gay people as equals, as adults that deserve the same rights they do, instead of children who are misbehaving and in need of Love, but also compassion and correction.

    amen

  28. When we said that, then the retort was “you’re talking about promiscuous homosexuality not committed homosexual relationships”.

    No, Eddy, that isn’t true. No one said that Joe Dallas was in a committed relationship.

    Now how about addressing my point?

    Why must conservative Christians ALWAYS make a point of showing their condemnation, even when they are trying to talk about being “loving”?

    Or, Eddy, are you in agreement that any reference to gay people must ALWAYS include condemnation?

  29. Timothy,

    Is it really all that impossible to talk about compassion without equating gays to promiscuity in the very same sentence?

    Not when it comes to many Evangelicals. Gay people are either trying to destroy marriage or family or to “change the definition” of these – which to many Evangelicals seems to amount to the same.

    What would be a TRUE blessing to see, is to have Evangelicals treat gay people as equals, as adults that deserve the same rights they do, instead of children who are misbehaving and in need of Love, but also compassion and correction.

  30. LaBarbera,

    No – you and I don’t agree. I have a personal relationship with God that is between just him and myself. How I interpret the bible, his “voice’ to me, his presence in my life, is probably different from you.

    From what I can tell you keep on going to gay places and reporting on them. Okay – let’s see – your crowd knows what you know and agrees with you. Gays have heard you preach and they disagree with you. Aaaaannnnd, you continue to go? Why? If you go to a home and preach and they do not recieve you then shake the dust of your sandals and move on to the next home.

    And believe it or not LaBarbera, I believe in choice. God has so given that to you. I don’t think you really know what the gay mind and heart is like. You report THINGS not insights, not compassion, not understanding.

  31. Timothy quoted Joe Dallas and made a stir about him referring to his promiscuous homosexual lifestyle.

    We in the gay community did not hear a compassionate Christian response,” said Dallas, who said he once lived a promiscuous homosexual lifestyle.

    So let’s do it again but leave out the word ‘promiscuous’.

    We in the gay community did not hear a compassionate Christian response,” said Dallas, who said he once lived a homosexual lifestyle.

    When we said that, then the retort was “you’re talking about promiscuous homosexuality not committed homosexual relationships”.

    Lol! And we’re just about due for “what’s a homosexual lifestyle anyway?”

  32. “We in the gay community did not hear a compassionate Christian response,” said Dallas, who said he once lived a promiscuous homosexual lifestyle.

    I’m just amused at the irony.

    Is it really all that impossible to talk about compassion without equating gays to promiscuity in the very same sentence?

    It cracks me up.

    The”loving compassionate” folks just can’t bring theirselves to mention gays without being sure that they condemn. They can’t say”love the sinner” without making sure they also add “and hate the sin”.

    Gay people aren’t stupid.

    We know that if you have to end EVERY love statement with a disclaimer about how awful homosexuality is then you don’t really mean the love statement at all.

  33. I found this quote from Mr. Dallas interesting:

    “We in the gay community did not hear a compassionate Christian response,” said Dallas, who said he once lived a promiscuous homosexual lifestyle.

    That is absolutely not true – Many of us in the gay community saw Christian Churches reaching out to help those with HIV and AIDS, just not conservative Evangelicals.

    I’m also a little saddened that Conservative Evangelicals only seem to define Christianity in terms of themselves. When they use the word Christian, they seem to only be speaking about THEIR particular type of Christianity – they don’t seem to make room for Christians who disagree with them.

    Gay people have been hearing the phrase, love the sin and hate the sinner for a long, long time – I think what, at least some, gay people today are tired of is having to constantly fight for rights that others are given without question. Some conservative Evangelicals still couch this fight in terms and phrases that are patronizing and offensive to the gay community, such as “redefining the family”. The tactics of many Evangelicals haven’t changed at all. Exaggerations like this are still being made to further a Conservative agenda and gay people see right through this. Until Evangelicals stop opposing gay people’s struggle for rights, I can not see how gay people will ever be able to see them as anything but an enemy.

    Gay couples are ALREADY together, gay families are ALREADY here – the problem is giving them the same rights that the secular state bestows on others. The family has already been redefined – it was redefined a long time ago.

  34. Mary, how do you know what is in Sally Kern’s heart? Is she “genuine” in your view? Am I “genuine”? My point in asking Warren the Sodom question is to question whether he still accepts the full Biblical revelation on homosexual behavior. I have my doubts based on his writings and statements. Certainly, we can agree with God’s judgment on homosexuality, no? If not, there are a whole host of sins that will need reevaluation. See my piece responding to Jeremy Hooper (creator of the “Good as You” blog) at http://www.aftah.org

  35. If we are concerned about being destryoyed as Sodom – plead on your behalf that if you are a righteous man you will be saved. I’m sure God will hear you and judge you.

  36. Michael,

    Me too.

    Labarbera,

    It is not only the gay activists who are upset but people like myself – an ex gay. Included in that list are my step sister a christian who was never gay, my mother, my nieghbors etc…

    It’s not gays against christians – it’s christians that are not gay that are upset as well.

  37. Mary: Yes, I am a Christian. I accepted Christ as Lord Savior in 1971. My point was that a lot of people see “Christians” as judgemental, hypocritical and unloving. And who can blame them? It is not their fault. We have not reflected Jesus. And I am first to admit that I have all too often failed in this regard.

  38. Warren, I wonder if Rep. Kern is feeling any love from you at this point… She has been demonized and vilified by homosexual activists — you know, the ones who talk so much about tolerance — to the point where she was assigned a bodyguard for a few days. She was even asked ON AIR in a TV interview if her son, Jesse, is “gay” — after speculation was fueled by homosexual activists, based in part on a false report in the “Queerty” website of a DIFFERENT Jesse Kern who had been charged with a sex crime (Sally’s real son would have been 12 at the time). Her pastor husband was falsely accused of being a KKK member, she received dozens of prank and hate phone calls at her home, and in their YouTube recording of her speech, the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund conveniently left out the part where she said that as a Bible-believing Christian, she loves all people. Oh, I almost forgot to mention the GLVF’s “open letter” to “Sally” in which they accuse her of having some kind of of responsibility for the killing of Matthew Shepard and other homosexuals. Have you chronicled THAT part of the controversy, and if not, why not?

    PS. As a Christian professor at Grove City College do you recognize God’s destruction of Sodom as evidence that societies that embrace sexual perversion and promiscuity meet an awful judgment?

  39. Michael,

    ARe you not a christian? And too be perfectly honest with you – I still struggle in finding the rare few who are genuine. I know I have harbored global thinking on this issue, too. But we need to address this and from both sides. Not all are bad. And we need to get to know eachother as people instead of as groups.

  40. Mary:

    While I think that J. James may be overstating the case just a bit, it is important to note that meny people see “Christians” in this way — and it is mainly the fault of the “Christians”. Sadly, that “global thinking” that “all Christians are horrible and mistreating” has been earned. Only “Christians” can change it.

  41. Some christians are not who they say they are. The idea of love your neighbor as yourself is very christian and found among some.

    Thinking that all christians are horrible, mis-treating, etc… is global thinking over an ENTIRE group of people.

    I’m sure J James you know some gays that are extraordinary heroes and people and some that you wish would just go away. Same with christians. Some are good and some are not.

  42. The euphemisms in the article stagger me. Then again, this was an article on a Christian site, so should it surprise anyone that it is replete with double-talk and spin when it comes to being honest about the nasty, hateful, and downright evil nature of so many Christians?

    For instance,

    “‘”We have responsibility to be consistent to live what we preach,’ [Joe Dallas] said.”

    Translation: we have to stop being such filthy, revolting liars when we claim to “love” gays but really wish that they would kill each other.

    “For decades Christians have struggled over how to respond appropriately to homosexuals.”

    Translation: For decades, Christians have claimed to “love” gays but have actually been heinous beasts of deceit.

    “[Joe Dallas] called it the ‘Jonah syndrome’ where Christians lose sight of the value and humanity of the people they oppose.”

    Translation: Joe Dallas called it the “Jonah Syndrome” where Christians say that they “love” gays but actively wish them to die of horrible, humiliating diseases.

    “In the 1980s when the AIDS epidemic came on the scene, homosexuals only saw hostility from the Church.”

    Translation: in the 1980s, homosexuals saw Christians put “Kill a queer for Christ” bumper stickers on their cars.

    Yes, I’m all too familiar with that “Christian love”. It deserves to be mocked because it’s the cheapest and fakest love there is.

  43. I thought this quote was worth the trip:

    And rather than pointing the finger at the sins of the culture, Dallas insisted the appropriate question to ask is “not what can be done about this moral state of the culture, but rather what can be done about the moral state of the Church.”

Comments are closed.