Or sm ...
Page 9
Thursday • April 10, 1997
University relations
ampus overrun with air of hostility toward gays and lesbians
I pi or some students,
H Texas A&M University
L is the most dangerous
)lace on Earth. Gay and
esbian students especially
Jo not feel safe while at
tending the University be-
| ei ' , [ause of its conservative
|-£ [haracter. It is the Univer
ity’s responsibility to in
lure safety for all students,
p jut because of the fear
nany gay students endure,
I t must be more responsive
Ind proactive in address
ing their needs.
Right now, all students have a “sup-
Rort system” to turn to if they are ha-
Guest Columnists
H.L. Baxter
Senior
Geography major
Bradley Houseton
Senior
political science major
rassed or violated. University
Police, Student Counseling
Service, Student Conflict Reso
lution Center and other de
partments have been estab
lished to help students if they
feel threatened. However,
many gay and lesbian students
feel they cannot turn to these
departments because the Uni
versity’s climate is so homo-
phobic, no administrator
would take their concerns seri
ously. The University practices its own
discrimination in handling, or not han
dling, homophobia — a fear that is the
foundation of hate.
At Texas A&M, gay students feel un
safe. This school year alone, gay students
have been targeted by the Ku Klux Klan
and the yell leaders, as well as fellow stu
dents via telephone harassment and van
dalism. Despite these incidents, the Uni
versity refuses to be held
responsible for insuring the safe
ty of gay students.
•t.T
fAfilU-
IneW
IT'S
in
Three's a crowd
: r -
3ns:
ble
Surrogate relationship complicates life, ignores child
evin” and “Todd” are gay
men, committed to each
other as partners. They’ve
decided they want a child. Rather
than pursue an adoption, Kevin and
Todd have decided to father the child
themselves. To do this, they need a
'voman to bear the child.
Enter “Lisa.” She has agreed to car-
ty their child. However, Lisa is no
mere surrogate. After she gives birth,
she will continue to be the child’s
mother, helping Kevin and Todd to
false the kid.
Lisa will be artificially inseminated. When a
curious student asked which father would sup
ply the sperm, Kevin explained Lisa would be
impregnated with a mixture of semen from
both fathers. So the question of which father
"ill actually donate his genes will be answered
hy sperm counts, averages and blind luck.
Lisa is a heterosexual woman. One day, she
might fall in love with a man who won’t mind
marrying into an “instant family” with a moth-
Cfand two gay fathers.
The popular wisdom of our society dictates
homosexuality is determined genetically. Gays
a nd lesbians defend their lifestyles by insisting
( heyare acting on God-given natures.
The underlying assumption is this: What is
Natural must be good, or at least acceptable.
So what’s natural about a pregnancy involv-
Ugtwo gay fathers, a straight mother, potential
'tepparents and some laboratory glassware?
Nothing at all.
Parenting schemes like this are inherently
-advised because they are devastatingly arti-
icial. However, this is just one example of how
many Americans — male and female, gay and
haight — are rushing to bring more children
mto this world by substituting technology and
e gal proceedings for old-fashioned family
'tructures. Too many people are following
Murphy Brown's example.
On campus, a flier for Gay Awareness Week
m'oclaims "Love makes a family.” This state
ment is true but incomplete.
Columnist
Jeremy Valdez
Senior
engineering major
Families, marriages and relation
ships in general require hard work,
good timing and defined roles, just to
name a few qualities.
Similarly, all children need love.
However, beyond this fundamental
need are things children deserve, like
security, stability, a certain level of
shelter and the comfort of innocence.
This includes sexual innocence. Not
just the innocence of not having had
sex, but the innocence which comes
from not knowing what defines sex.
The diseases, heartaches and
predators of this world make it necessary to
provide even young children with certain facts
to protect them.
However, experts and laypeople alike believe
sexual education for children should be age-
appropriate. Most young kids just want to
know “where they came from.”
A child juggled by two gay fathers and a
mother will be burdened, at a very tender age,
with a huge chunk of the convoluted truth of
human sexuality. Most kids find this dialogue
daunting enough when they’re told of just one
orientation and two body parts.
The child will need to know why some kids
don’t understand his or her family situation,
and why some kids tease while others whisper.
Unfortunately, it is the children’s lives that
are complicated when adults cleverly circum
vent the consequences of their lifestyle choic
es. Too many people refuse to acknowledge it
should take one devoted man and one devoted
woman to create a child.
Granted, it is possible for a child to be raised
in a radically unconventional household, and
most likely he or she would be very loved in his
or her home. But the arrangement wouldn’t be
natural at all.
Gay parents and single people are well with
in their rights to utilize sperm banks or con
tract surrogates.
But children are living, breathing people,
and shouldn’t be used as banners for a cause.
The yell leader incident was particu
larly damaging to the safety of gays. At
the yell practice in Austin last semester,
three yell leaders referred to the U.T.
football team as “fags” and “queers,”
turning a night of celebration into a
night of gay-bashing. The University
administration did nothing to repri
mand the yell leaders. Neither Universi
ty President Ray Bowen nor Vice-Presi
dent of Student Affairs J. Malon
Southerland made an official
response to the incident. An
apology was given by one
yell leader to the Gay, Les
bian, and Bisexual Aggies,
but not to the student
body at large. It is no won
der many gay students feel
they are not allowed to
be Aggies; the very lead
ers of the University
are against them.
On the part of the
University, silence is
acceptance concern-
I
Photo by Ryan Rogers, The Battalion
ing this type of hate. By not responding
publicly to such incidents, the Univer
sity sanctions the defamation of gays
and lesbians. The University continues
to allow student groups to show preju
dice openly toward each other. This
prejudice fosters an environment of
hostility, jeopardizing the safety of all
students on campus.
This environment of hostility am
plifies the level of fear gay and lesbian
students experience while attending
Texas A&M. Although the University
provides resources to help students
who have been harassed or personally
violated, many gay students do not
utilize these services. This unwilling
ness to use available resources lies in
the risk of having to admit one’s ho
mosexuality to a stranger in the
process of filing a complaint. By re
porting a crime, many gay students
feel they are making themselves a tar
get. They feel uneasy hav
ing their name on a sheet
of paper as the subject of fc
a gay-related hate crime.
The task of insuring
the safety of gay and les
bian Aggies is a double-
edged sword — the admin- ’
istration is fearful of a
population it does not un- !
derstand, while the gay pop- ‘
ulation fears retribution
from the University for being ‘
themselves. It is fear which
breeds prejudice and hate. The
response (or lack thereof) of
the administration to gay
and lesbian hate crimes is in
dicative of the homophobia
saturating Texas A&M.
The University administra
tion and the gay student popu
lation need to meet in the mid
dle in an effort to cure
homophobia on campus. Howev
er, the University must initiate
this process if it is to convey
its sincerity toward ensuring
the safety of gay students. The
reason gay students feel so isolated
at Texas A&M is because they do not
trust the University to take their con
cerns seriously. By reestablishing trust,
the University administration could
show its willingness to work with gay
students, not around them.
God's sexual preference
Christ loves everyone, including gays and lesbians
A ccording to
the Bible and
the teachings
of Jesus Christ, the
act of homosexuali
ty is wrong. This is
readily accepted by
the religious right.
True followers of
Christ also are com
manded to love God
and to love eveiyone
around them — de
spite differences in
sexual preference, race or be
lief. Unfortunately, this is not
embraced as easily.
Sadly, only a handful of
gentle, compassionate and
loving Christians truly “pick
up their cross” and blindly fol
low Christ.
Following Christ basically
means four things: glorifying
God, learning his word, teach
ing his word and serving and
loving his children.
Each of these acts is self-sac
rificing. These objectives have
no respect for sexual preference,
desires of personal achievement
or personal happiness.
These goals are designed per
fectly to humble the creation
and give glory to the creator.
These goals are a simplifica
tion of the Christian life, which
was taught by Christ himself.
In short, Jesus taught com
passion — not gay-bashing.
Religious leaders continue
to single out three or four sins
of socie ty (including homo
sexuality) and preach burning
condemnation, often mixed
with hate.
Because of this hateful en
terprise, gays and lesbians
who may be searching for
something to fill a void in their
Opinion Editor
Alex Walters
Senior
journalism major
lives (a void com
pletely filled by
Christ) are left out
and forced to the con
clusion that Christ
didn't die for them.
The religious
right is doing a
bang-up job of
keeping gays as far
as possible from
God’s love.
Despite what
Christ taught, despite
that he “came not to
condemn the world but to save
it,” (John 3.17) people who call
themselves Christians still cling
to the humanistic principle of
hating everyone who is different.
(A Christianas) goal should be
to spread the gospel instead
of forcing every homosexual
into the mold the religious
community has created.
Christians should embrace
the gay community. Their goal
should be to spread the gospel in
stead of forcing every homosexu
al into the mold the religious
community has created.
“Every man has sinned and
fallen short of the glory of God,”
(Romans 3.23) and that sin can
not be forgiven by men. Sin is be
tween God and the individual. It
is not the Christian’s responsibili
ty to damn someone to hell, but
to open their arms and teach the
gospel of Jesus Christ.
Just as one human cannot
successfully convert another to
Christianity, one cannot be
damned by another.
Damnation and salvation
are acts belonging only to
God, and yet the religious
right and those who fail to
take the time to learn God’s
word feel free to damn anyone
they see fit.
It is impossible to call your
self a Christian without know
ing what Christ taught and what
he did. This is why the homo
sexual act is a sin (because
Christ spoke out against it), but
this is also why condemnation
is a sin as well.
Christ reminded his follow
ers not to complain of the
“speck in your brother’s eye,
without first removing the plank
in your own.” (Matt. 7.3-5.)
Christ was
love and for
giveness.
Christ never
threw a stone,
nor did he con
demn. Christ is
the savior.
Christians
should start
acting like it.
Christians should stop per
verting the word of God to fit
their lifestyle, whether it be a
gay lifestyle or a hateful, preju
diced one.
Ministers should stop telling
people Jesus had trouble dealing
with his own sexuality (because
it is not true), and the religious
community should stop telling
people they are going to hell be
cause they are gay. Ministers
and all Christians should be
dealing with the disease instead
of the symptoms.
In short, they should be
preaching the gospel, the story of
a man who loved with his heart
and died because of it.