John Gechter's story has been troubling me ever since I read it in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09128/968674-298.stm)on Friday, May 8th. Gechter was set to graduate from Grove City College, Grove City, Pennsylvania which is about 65 miles north of Pittsburgh.
The college is situated in a rural area, and was founded in 1879 as a strict Christian institution, which it remains today. It prides itself as an authentic Christian institution. The college is also listed as one of the top ten conservative schools in the nation. Sex outside of marriage, heterosexual or gay is forbidden, according to the student handbook, and will result in disciplinary action.
Gechter found out first hand this week that the rule book was serious. The discipline was harsh after it was discovered he was working in the adult film industry as a 22 year old porn star. While there was no on campus porn film activity, the student, working towards a degree in molecular biology, was suspended indefinitely and can not re-apply until late 2010.
Gechter, who worked under the name Vincent DeSalvo, has received over 200 threatening emails, according to the Gazette newspaper, and he has also had food thrown at him in the dining room at the Christian College.
According to the account, the student who flew to various cities on the weekends for film shoots, used the money he earned for college tuition and expenses. Tuition alone at the college is listed at over $12,000 per year.
The student, who claims he is bisexual, says he remains a believer and a Christian, although the incident has forced him to re-evaluate his beliefs. He, according to published reports, says it was wrong to participate in the industry. He admits he was wrong and at the same time says the Christian college is not demonstrating Christian values.
I tend to support the porn star and think the Christian Grove City College has mishandled the situation. Forgiveness is a key tenant of Christianity; as I recall there was a good thief and a bad thief crucified along with Jesus, and there are other teachings about sexual misconduct and who should cast the first stone. And we only need to recall the words "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who have sinned against us."
I do understand this is a very difficult situation and the only information is gleaned from a public newspaper. And I would be sure there were some officials who agonized over the issues. However, the actions by some students and administrators at this college does not seem to be in keeping with Gospel. What are your thoughts?
(Note: I did check out some Web pages for Vincent DeSalvo and yes it is pornographic by almost every definition. Now the photo of the snake I have included is not to demean snakes which I think are pretty cool creatures. But I did not want to submit porn and besides it was the mythological serpent snake in Genesis that brought about a lot of trouble.)
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 63
I don't think however that the students and faculty should have ostracized him or treated him poorly. Why was he on campus once it was revealed? That may have not been the best decision on his part.
The school had it's rules and he had to be aware of it. Being a Christian school, I am sure they had to do something quickly or the parents would have had an outcry or pulled out their children.
The problem with many Christians, is that many don't act very much like Christ and many people turn away from God because of their behavior. God is interested in our hearts. In the Bible it says, Judge not lest ye be judged.
It was up to the school administration to deal with him. Rules are rules though, I can fully understand why they would have enforced them.
He is making plenty of money if he could afford the $12000 a year cost. I am sure plenty of other colleges would be happy to have him as a student.
For being more forgiving, that just isn't possible. To hold students to a moral code and certain set of rules, there must be consistency. That being said, the school is letting him finish his last classes elsewhere and still giving him his diploma. That sounds more than reasonable to me.
For the record, he stayed on campus more than a week after this happened. He can't have been that uncomfortable, as he still ate in the dining hall, lived in the dorms, and worked out in the school weight room. He may have received some hate mail (there are some crazies here) but I am fairly certain 200 is either an exaggeration or that 190 of them came from the GCC Gun Club. If he was being persecuted or harassed so badly, why did he stay so long?
A student found the pictures and leaked his secret electronically. No one knows exactly who.
All of this, "he should be forgiven" nonsense is ridiculous. He violated a rule. Everyone at the school knows about it. What happens if he doesn't receive the consequence that is spelled out in the rule book he ignored? The rules become meaningless.
And though you're trying to dismiss the 200 threatening emails as having 190 of them being from the GCC Gun Club, I would think that to a rational person, this would be even more threatening.
@ Shannon: I agree that the hate mail is wrong. And I can't really have expected you to know this, but the Gun Club in no way has guns. They are just a minority of extremist conservatives that do things like have 5 person anti-Obama rallies and put up posters about 2nd Amendment rights. They are far too cowardly to actually take any action that isn't sending a nasty email. Most of them are just as outcast from the average students of the school as Gechter is now. Besides, Gechter could really thrash any one of them.
@ Ellen
Most students that break this rule get away with it for that very reason. Many do get caught do to policies of intervisitation between gender separated dorms, but really it is a hard rule to police. A girl and her boyfriend received similar consequences for being caught having sex in a public parking lot last week.
@ Greg Sprinks
Thanks for the encouragement. It's a tough week.
1.)Forgiveness can only take place in sight of repentance. There was no "I'm sorry. I'll stop breaking this rule." In fact, in interviews he has stated that he in no way intends on giving up gay porn. Also, there is the matter of fairness. It is also a Biblical view that rules and laws put into effect by authorities should be followed as if they were God's law. He broke the rules.
2.) Poverty is actually a far cry from the Christian value of detachment from the material. That being said, materialism takes place inside a person. Do you hook everyone up to lie detectors and ask them how much they like their things? Violence is certainly punished. Demeaning behavior is also policed by the College. I'm certain that Gechter did not bring hate mail (if there actually was any) to the attention of the college because, as he stated in several interviews, he was hoping to sue those people for defamation of character.
"Forgiveness can only take place in sight of repentance."
That sort of condition is not a sign of forgiveness. A better term would be vengeance. I haven't been in a bible study class for over thirty-five years. But, I recall something about vengeance not being available to mere humans. True forgiveness is something that is given by a person out of compassion and empathy. Where those qualities are lacking there is an expectation of repentance. It is a bit hypocritical, GCC.
I'm fully aware of the concept of poverty being Godly, but the Bible in no way ever says that one must be poor. Catholics (monks, nuns, priests) have instituted in into their canon as a part of the sacrament of holy orders, but even Catholics do not believe that the sacrament of holy orders is even advisable for most people. For Christianity to function, Christians should preferably be spread among all people, rich and poor, as to minister and witness to all. Wealth is not condemned by the Bible. Greed and materialism are. A person can be a perfectly acceptable, generous, charitable Christian and still maintain money and possessions. Some are called to be tax collectors. It's your attitude towards those earthly things that matters.
@ Joe and many others
Are you trying to say that Christianity preaches freedom from the consequence of one's actions? Christianity holds that one should follow the laws laid out by those in power as if they were God's laws. He willingly submitted to the standards set out by the college, violated them without remorse (he shooting his first DVD this weekend, look through some interviews), and perfectly predictable consequences came. This is an issue of a basic legal contract. Is it hypocrisy to say "If you have premarital sex, we will suspend you," then to suspend a student who has premarital sex? Absolutely not! Is it hypocrisy to say "I will not have premarital sex, and if I do I will accept the consequences laid out in the school rules," then to ahve premarital sex and attempt to escape the consequence? Why, yes it is!
@ spartan
I wonder if you see the paradox in telling people not to tell other people how to live? I suppose you think that a perfect Christian society would bear no consequences for one's actions at all in order to reserve judgement for God? Your theology and thought processes in this statement are wrong. The rule of worldly law and consequence is indeed Biblical.
Most of you have missed the mark on what the bible says about this anyways. As for spartan and your story the incident you refer to did happen. Jesus had Mary right there when he said "He who is without sin let him cast the first stone." In other words you all have sinned. None of you have the right to point a finger. Who are you to call out Christian people as phonys spartan. Leave the judging to God. Just as he can read your heart so can he read those whom YOU call phony.
No, GCC, I did not say that and didn't imply it in my comment. My comment still stands. Christians are more concerned with the regulation of behavior than they are with a healthy spiritual life. The other parts of my comment have to do with drawing an erroneous connection between forgiveness and repentance. Perhaps, you need a remedial course in reading comprehension, GCC.
Lora,
Do your research before you make claims that cannot be proven. Not one supposed quote of Jesus in the New Testament has ever been verified. They are words made up by writers who didn't begin to write any part of the New Testament for nearly a century after Jesus walked on the earth. I understand that there aren't many Christian leaders who are honest enough to state the facts. But, the theologians have been quite clear on the matter of the words of Jesus. They are third and fourth hand accounts retold during the first century of the common era.
I fail to see the divorce between one's behavior and his spiritual well being. I also don't see how the school's actions can be seen as 'vengeance.' He plainly broke a rule and was given the appropriate consequence. If you do some research you will find that, while there is no way to authenticate Jesus' words as told in the Bible, the Bible is one of the most historically accurate documents in existence.
However, God's forgiveness can only be found with repentance.
and if so...did they have it dipped in the holy water since they deem it sinful?
And who deemed it sinful? The school made no such distinction. The school said that his behavior went against the established Christian standards of the school, that is, he broke the rules. He was expelled NOT on religious terms, but on legal terms. Simple contract breach. While it is sinful behavior, that is not the basis of his suspension.
...Now go, and sin no more."
Then I sic my personal demon on them...muhahahha
my partner and i know john personally. he has been a (non-porn) model for my partner, d.gauss, for a year now. john is an intelligent and kind individual. he is smart and has a great future ahead of him.
the sad part is the 200+ CHRISTIAN students that ganged up on him in the cafeteria and threw food at him while the CHRISTIAN faculty stood by and even a few joined in.
hmmm?
reminds me of a moment in the bible where the people were about to stone a prostitute and jesus reminded them, "you who is without sin cast the first stone." in this case it was food.
and isn't it funny, it was a student that found his videos online. why was that student online looking at gay porn? i think this is a blemish on the so-called-christian college and they should be ashamed of themselves. in a country where only the financially stable can ease through life and can readily pay for education "legitimately," i think john is to be commended for finding a way to survive the economic slump of the u.s. and put himself through school to better himself.
and it is sad that our young people- without great riches- are subject to having to find ways to get themselves an education such as this. but when you haven't got- you haven't got.
d.gauss, myself and sinister minister underground theater will support this sweet kid in anyway we can and hope that the g.l.b.t. community will rally around him and give him the support he deserves.
1. The school, the institution is not to be blamed here. The school has rules and regulations of which the student body is aware. People should not be angry with the school. I am sure it provides an excellent education to those who matriculate there. The school is set up as a private Chrstian institution and regulates itself according to the dogma of its sect of Christianity. Rules and regulations should be enforced. This being said, I come to my second point.
2. The behavior of the "civilized" humans at this institution is beyond comprehension. There is a chain of command that is to be followed and a link in that chain apparently snapped and created a very disturbing incident. Whether John should still have been in the cafeteria a week after the incident is a moot point. 200 people, students and faculty took it into their own hands to mete out discipline. The question here is are the people who took part in this incident christians or hypocrits? What right, whether secular or religious did they have to assault John. What part of their humanity broke down? What part of their Christian values broke down? No matter how one's sensibilities are offended, does anyone have the right to engage in illegal behavior. What John did may have broken a school rule, but it did not break the law of the U.S. constitution or the law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The people who threw food at him did break the law, and did not follow what Jesus would do. Personally I think Jesus was great. He probably would have pulled John asside and counselled him. I don't think he would have encouraged 200 people to engage in the public humiliation of another human being. This is why those who read about this are outraged. Too many people use religion as an excuse for why they do the things they do. Those people who justify what happen to John as God's law are twisted and hypocrits. You don't have to justify what John did in his private life, if it offended you, then it offended you. That offense does not give you the right to flaunt God's laws as justice. Those in charge, have the right to discipline, not those in the cafeteria. By the way, isn't wasting food some sort of sin as well?
Being gay, I was curious and wanted to get a good look at "Vincent DeSalvo" aka John Gechter. He is clearly talented and will enjoy the benefits of his good looks for many years to come. I don't know what his academic record is. I tend to agree with you that if the college strictly prohibits what he does to earn money for tuition that he should be disciplined. I totally disagree that he is doing anything morally or ethically wrong. He is a citizen of the USA and is entitled to live his life according to the way that he sees fit (as long as no one is criminally affected by his behavior). That is the law of the land. So, I'm not considering it intolerance for the school to discipline him. I think that he makes a good point when he says that the school is not showing Christian values. Of course, I've seen Christianity become something completely unrecognizable to me in my lifetime. Today, Christianity shows very little of the love that Jesus was said to have ordered everyone to become a part of. Today, Christianity seems wrapped around political and social notions of right and wrong. It is difficult to understand it because while there was always a sense of conservative thinking amongst Christians, it had nothing whatsoever to do with kicking people down when they make mistakes. If anything, it was always about lifting people up. The other thing that I have to say about religion in general is that just thirty or forty years ago religion was considered personal and all people in the USA were respected for their perspective on religion. Today, it is more like a boxing match to listen to religious speakers and spokespeople. I find this to be rather unfortunate and rude.
The school doesn't need good lawyers, they haven't done anything illegal or unethical. If you read the evolution of John's interviews, they began with "I'm suing to school for damages and everyone in it for defamation," and now don't mention suing at all. Even John knows he'd be fighting a losing battle.
@ The Undeniable and D. Gauss
I'm in no way condoning any of the actions that were taken against John in hate in my next point. Any actions taken in hate towards another human being are despicable. BUT
"the sad part is the 200+ CHRISTIAN students that ganged up on him in the cafeteria and threw food at him while the CHRISTIAN faculty stood by and even a few joined in. "
You made this up. There was no mob of 200 students throwing food at John in the cafeteria. John did say he received almost 200 emails, notice he doesn't say emails from almost 200 people, but 200 emails containing hate messages. He also says fruit was thrown at him in the cafeteria, once, which I don't doubt. There are some ignorant people here, same as there are at any college or university. Let's not pretend that students at public universities wouldn't have reacted to this bombshell either. But that isn't the issue. Also, you say that some of the faculty joined in. That hasn't been said by John in any of his interviews, or even in this paraphrase of the newspaper article.
I know for a fact that no crowd of people was following John with torches and pitchforks, or even with apples and oranges. John stayed on campus for a week (until he dropped his appeal and willfully withdrew) after everyone found out, eating in the cafeterias and working out in the gym. I have personally seen him eat at least five meals here, post-outing, in which no one threw food at him and he ate peacefully at a table full of students. He may have gotten some funny looks, but that would happen at any institution where a well-known, 4 year student drops a bomb like this on everyone. I'm sure he did receive some hate mail (and I'm sure it WASN'T from the faculty), he probably had fruit thrown at him once, that is clearly not a very Christian attitude. But why try to phenomenalize it into something even John has not claimed?
@ Greg Sprinks
The Gospel teaches that one should follow worldly rules and laws as if they were God's laws, because they have been put into effect for a reason. These are rules and laws he chose to put himself under, Jesus probably would have followed them or accepted the consequence for breaking them. To do otherwise is blatant hypocrisy.
On the very serparate issue of our poverty discussion, I have plainly admitted the Biblical standing of poverty, but pointed out that the Bible never even suggests that Christians should all embrace poverty, which it doesn't. I didn't say that it was purely Catholic, just that Catholics have taken the Biblical view that it is right for some, and not for others. Buddhist monks can do whatever they please, but I highly doubt that they will claim it to be Biblical.
I appreciate your respect in this debate. I have posted on another site or two and been harshly harassed for my religion by the homosexual community. I recognized before this that many Christians discriminate against others for having different systems of belief, and that they blatantly ignore the "Hate the sin, love the sinner" rule. I did not realize before how bigoted so many homosexuals are in their persecution of Christians. Thank you, and everyone else who has responded to me without prejudice, just as I have tried to be respectful in my own posts.
@ Isabeaux Dom
No one has defended those who sent the hateful emails or thrown fruit, but please don't operate on the incorrect reporting of people commenting on this site that he was ganged up on in the cafeteria. John has claimed one incident throwing fruit, and has in no way made any claims of faculty involvement. These are made up by posters on this site.
Also, the school does have a pretty stringent "Taste don't waste" policy as well as a "No throwing food or we'll fine you" policy instituted at the beginning of this semester. Kid must have been sneaky to get away with throwing that fruit.
@ Joe T
You are right on accreditation not meaning that the school has any great quality. I brought that up as merely one piece of evidence. Princeton Review's numerous honors and ratings are a very valid and commonly used tool as well that have nothing to do with accreditation. Princeton review rates the school as one of the "best colleges in the northeast" as a standout institution in our region, one of the "best 368 schools" in the nation, and one of the "top 50 best value private colleges: for excellent academics at reasonable prices with generous financial aid." Beyond this, all of our Molec Bio professors are regularly published in peer reviewed journals, and our students go on to be accepted into prestigious and competitive graduate schools. As I said earlier, the school is highly selective academically with an incoming ACT average of 29 and an average high school GPA of 3.73. While Molec Bio is primarily a pre-med major here, I'm sure there are plenty of our students making strides in research as well. I'm not saying that there aren't better programs, but we have well established academic excellence, and unless you have some evidence that can refute the SECULAR authorities on our programs or some kind of credentials to judge them, you probably shouldn't. And what is your source to say that no molecular biologist from GCC are producing noteworthy work in the field? I hope it's more than a google search. (Sorry if I seem agressive on this point, but it's finals week and as any Grover can attest, as well as most anyone who knows anything about the school, academic rigor and integrity are high. I'm stressed and don't appreciate degradation of the school's programs, which certainly are NOT substandard.)
Now, without trying to characterize the school as the individuals who may have shown less than Christian morals in their interactions with John (the email senders and the fruit thrower), who no one has tried to defend the actions of, how exactly is the school exercising less than Christian values? John brought this consequence on himself. The school didn't kick him down, and I don't see how they could have lifted him up in this situation. You have very little concept of the school's Christian ministry, so I would be careful in saying that the school does not exhibit the values of Christian love. As it stands, we are more than an outreach service, and rules, consequences, and social and political rights and wrongs are important to running a private, religious institution of learning.
It is easy to look at John Gechter's outside activities to support the cost of tuition and sit in judgment. But, I have to say that Mr. Gechter isn't the first Christian who believes that he shouldn't be treated the way he is treated because of these "supposed" Christian values. As a gay man, I know better. There are no Christian values that show an ounce of respect for gays and lesbians. Christians do have a history of loving one another and even their neighbor. But, don't cross those Christians. For, they also have a history of torturing and even murdering those who do not measure up to their beliefs about the way people should live.
Romans 13
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
There are other passages in Matthew, Peter, and Acts that allow that one must respect man's law as God's law unless it conflicts with God's law, as in the case of slavery or other implicitly evil laws.
Great defense of your statement. You just said "Because I said so." Princeton Review is one of the definitive college rating services and rated us as one of the best COLLEGES in the region, not Christian colleges, colleges period and as one of the 50 best private, not Christian, but private institutions in the United States. There are over 150 private colleges in PA alone. Unless you have actual insight into our department or academics, or some kind of proof to back up your statements, do not represent your opinions as facts about our programs. That is called ignorance.
I thought we were past the point of people calling this discrimination because of sexual perference. John was not treated in any specific way by the school for being gay. Similar punishments are given to heterosexuals regularly for similar offenses. Just a couple weeks ago a heterosexual couple was suspended indefinitely for one year, notice that it is the same exact punishment, for having sex on the hood of a car in a local parking lot. Do not imply that the school's standards have discriminated against his sexuality or disrespected his sexuality. That is an outright lie. Once again, if he thinks that how he was treated was wrong, perhaps he shouldn't have agreed that he would follow certain rules or face that treatment. No one forced him to, he chose to submit to those rules.
As for your analysis of Christian values, you are wrong again. What you are referring to is the fallibility of man to carry out Christian values. Christian values of love and service most definitely show respect to homosexuals. John Gechter is the one here who disrespected the school when he broke rules he agreed to follow. God has called Christians to love and ALL people. Go ahead and try to throw historical examples of Christian discrimination at me, they don't apply to this situation. No one here has been harmed or persecuted for their personal beliefs, except Christians, who you are labelling and stereotyping.
Again, this is not just Christian history, this is HUMAN history. Or don't the Christians who were burned at the stake and executed for their beliefs during the Roman Empire, the Muslim invasions, and still today in places like Darfur count as people? There have been many hypocritical Christians who have persecuted others, but this is in no way a distinctive of Christian people. In reality, the Christian history has black spots on it, but you conveniently ignore all good that has come from Christians towards non Christians. I think you underestimate the effect of missions work in the world today. A strong majority of charity work in all areas is performed and funded by Christians and Christian organizations. Work that reaches all kinds of people, religious and nonreligious, gay and straight. There is plenty history of Christian outreach and love, even if you refuse to acknowledge it. Maybe you've heard of Mother Theresa for instance?
"the sad part is the 200+ CHRISTIAN students that ganged up on him in the cafeteria and threw food at him while the CHRISTIAN faculty stood by and even a few joined in."
What was said in the interview was that one student threw one piece of fruit at John. Do you see the disconnect there? Do you see how you took the individual, albeit despicable, but individual actions of one ignorant person and tried to demonize 200 students? There was also no claims that no one has gossiped or jeered John. No one at the school has claimed perfection, and you can't expect people not to talk about a bombshell like that after you have hidden it from them for years. That's human nature. I'm not saying it's right or in line with Christian morals, but what YOU reported in your message was false.
And actually, no, John did what he WANTED to to get where he wanted in life. No one HAS to become a gay porn star. He resorted to it out of convenience. He's free to do those things, but when he has agreed not to, he should face the consequence for breaking that agreement.
I'm sorry to hear that you were treated that way. You were excommunicated? That's bizarre. Excommunication is a Catholic thing where the Pope cuts you off from God. You were a married priest? I wasn't aware that the Pope did much excommunicating these days. Non-Catholic Christian traditions don't believe in the power of any man to excommunicate, so you must have been. Contrary to this case, in which John was not disciplined for being homosexual but for breaking the contract he agreed to in coming to the school, you should have taken legal action against your sons schools and your wife's employer. It is illegal for your wife to be fired on the basis of YOUR sexual orientation. It is also illegal for the school to kick your children out for your sexual orientation. That is, unless you agreed to a "I will not come out as a homosexual under the penalty of my kids being expelled from this school" agreement as John agreed to a "I will not have premarital sex or take part in any activities that would damage the schools reputation (such as pornographic acting) under the penalty of indefinite suspension."
I'm sure that someone probably threw fruit at John, once. I'm 100 percent sure that 200 people did not, if for no other reason than because John hasn't claimed it and because he would have called the police or sued if they had. Mostly, I don't believe it because you made it up based on the fact that he reported receiving almost 200 emails and having fruit thrown at him once.
Also, I'd like to know how one is "manipulated" into becoming a minister (as this requires at least 6 years of college), how one let's a school and college get away with blatantly illegal actions, and how you were "excommunicated." These all seem a little fishy. They may be legitimate, but that's a lot of incongruities to go with one, true story. Hopefully it is because you are attempting strong language rather than outright dishonesty, the same as your false story about mobs of 200 throwing food at John.
There is no school policy against sin. As Christians, the school recognizes human depravity and that no one can be perfect. The history of hypocritical Christianity, which I acknowledged is real, is not applicable to this case. John is the hypocrit in this situation. He said, "I will not do this or I will accept this punishment," then violated that agreement and disputed the punishment. The school just said, "If you come here, you can't do these things, or we will suspend you." Then they did exactly what they promised.
I'm not here to defend Judaism or Islam, but you are mistaking Christianity with human depravity. Nothing in Christianity says "do as we say or you will be ridiculed or executed." I think that you will find any ridicule or execution that was claimed to be based on Christianity is actually a rather large divergence from cannon and Scripture.
Don't claim that John was mobbed by 200 attackers in the cafeteria, John hasn't. Don't say that Grove City College's academic programs must be substandard simply because of a religious affiliation when minimal research says otherwise. Don't attack all of Christianity based something that applies to very specific circumstances and people. These kinds of claims and arguments scream out ignorance.
You just go in circles. You have made one thing crystal clear, however. As far as you are concerned, John Gechter has been treated with Christian love. John Gechter disagrees with you. As I said before, there are many good things that Christians do. However, it is nothing short of lying to refuse to see the many horrifying things that have been done in the name of Christianity.
As to your characterization of my comments: At no time did I or anyone else refer to the religious affiliation of GCC with respect to the quality of work that has been produced by its graduates. Live with your own delusion.
Well, first you said that Grove City had a substandard program, I offered evidence to the contrary, then you said that it had a good reputation for "Christian education" but couldn't hold a candle to other school's curriculum, even though I'd wager you have almost no insight at all as to waht our curriculum is. That sounds like a pretty clear implication to me.
I know that I have gone in circles, but that's because several people have challenged me on the same accusations.
I know this is difficult to understand, but sometimes acting in Christian love means holding someone accountable for their actions. It is rather plain that John was, in fact treated with Christian love.
Also, I plainly acknowledged the fact horrifying things have been done in the name of Christianity. This is not one of them. I just pointed out that these things neither apply to this situation, nor do they characterize all of Christendom, past or present.
Before anybody says that I am glorifying the attacks on John via email or the incident of assault by produce, I am referring to the school administration's actions in dealing out disciplinary measures, NOT the actions taken by those individuals that are plainly disgusting acts of hate.
I respect gays and lesbians and I'm a Christian, as do plenty of others. To make blanket statements about a group of people based on religion is called prejudice and bigotry. What do you say about all the gays and lesbians who fancy themselves Christians? Are the disrespectful in this way? Or the Christians, who may not agree with your lifestyle, but form and participate in gay/straight alliances such as the student organized one here at the college? I think that the reason so many Christians have trouble respecting gays and lesbians might just be the attitude gays and lesbians have towards Christians. There is untold prejudice and animosity on both sides of this battle, and your attitude towards Christianity will do nothing but further the divide.
Thanks, I believe you said that in response to my "intolerance is wrong from both the Christian and gay/lesbian perspective in relation to the other," so I'm not entirely sure you understood my message. Just to clarify, Christian and gay/lesbian tensions are fueled from both sides, and respect should be reflected both ways in this. I think that your statement should be addressed not specifically towards any one person, however, but that it applies to all. As I said in my earlier message, prejudice and bigotry are unacceptable practices in either direction in this situation, and it is often ignored that it is even possible for one to do so against a Christian.
I have full grasp over the enormity of bigotry. You aren't educating me of anything here. I was just trying to show you that Christians receive their fair share as well, and that unfounded accusations and blanket condemnations of Christianity are the same as the bigotry being claimed against gays in this thread. No matter how you justify it, it's not equal treatment to treat Christians differently based on their beliefs.