Anglican Mainstream

Back to the Oppressive Future: Homosexualist Attempts at Suppressing Rational Debate at Bowdoin College and the Maine “Gay Marriage” Referendum by Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D. 3 November 2009

My speaking engagement at Bowdoin College near Portland, Maine, on Friday Oct. 30 presented me with a glimpse into the oppressive future of homosexualist ascendancy. The talk was attended by about 150 persons, including a large contingent of “GLBT” students and staff who, I heard from other students, had been planning how they might derail my presentation. During the Q&A time after my presentation the Director of Student Life, a homosexualist activist named Allen DeLong, called me “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” and made an implicit threat to the Intervarsity staff responsible for bringing me there.

Before I go into the details, first a little background information. I was invited by the Intervarsity chapter at Bowdoin to give a presentation on the Bible and homosexual practice primarily intended for Bowdoin’s Christian fellowship group but also open to the whole campus. There were pleasant features about Bowdoin College. I found the Bowdoin campus to be aesthetically pleasing. Another nice thing about Bowdoin is the presence of two outstanding Intervarsity staff persons, Robert and Sim-Kuen Chan Gregory, who have committed their lives to helping the Bowdoin Christian Fellowship (BCF) over the last five years. They have done so at considerable financial cost and sacrifice to themselves …  

[In my address] I also noted Jesus’ expansive call to discipleship: not an affirmation of our innate biological urges but instead a demand for nothing less than taking up our cross, denying ourselves, and losing our life … I added briefly that the Greco-Roman milieu was well aware of the existence of non-exploitative homosexual unions and even floated a number of theories akin to our modern notions of “homosexual orientation,” making alleged “new knowledge” arguments for dismissing the witness of Scripture not so new after all. I repeatedly emphasized that this was not about hate but about the true meaning of love, the kind of love that parents have when their young child is about to touch a hot stove.

The talk lasted about an hour-and-a-half. The Q&A time that followed lasted about 45 minutes. The questions/comments were almost entirely from the aggressive “GLBT” side of the audience. I think the evangelical Christians were, for the most part, too intimidated to say anything. Throughout my presentation and responses in Q&A there were many from the “GLBT” contingent who behaved rudely: eye-rolling, turning to talk to others while I was speaking, some abortive attempts at ridicule. I think that matters would have been much worse had I shown that I was susceptible to their intimidation or responded in an unintelligent fashion. To be sure, there were other students who acted respectfully. Some attempted to lecture me about the historical and literary context of certain texts, although that stopped when in my responses I was able to show how they had misconstrued that context. There was not a single question or comment the entire evening that posed any problem for what I had presented.

However, that made the Director of Student Life, Allen DeLong, mad. Instead of setting an example for students as regards rational argumentation and civil discourse, DeLong launched into an ad hominem tirade. In a blustery manner he said words to the effect of the following: “This really isn’t a question for Dr. Gagnon or about Dr. Gagnon but a statement to the Intervarsity staff. What does it say about the character of the Intervarsity staff to bring this wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing here?” DeLong went on to rail against me for comparing homosexual unions to incest and polyamory [emphasis added] and to intimate that the Student Association Handbook had been violated by having me come speak. I took his comments to the Intervarsity staff as an implicit threat that the latter would be made to recant my teaching and invitation or else be thrown off the campus. We shall see in the next few days whether that interpretation is accurate…

I reminded DeLong that my analogies were not to adult-child incest and promiscuous polyamory but rather to adult-committed forms of incest and polyamory. When I challenged DeLong to give me a rationale argument why these were not the best analogues to homosexual practice, he attempted repeatedly to switch the subject. DeLong realized that if it could be shown that adult-committed homosexual unions were more like adult-committed incestuous or polyamorous unions than like heterosexual unions, then support for “gay marriage” and the tarring of opponents with “homophobic bigotry” would quickly evaporate (go here for further discussion of this point).[6]

When I repeated my request that DeLong answer my question, he had no comeback. Nothing. Ironically, I found out later that [gay marriage advocate] Prof. Ellison, in his talk the previous night, had been asked during Q&A if there was anything wrong with close kin or three or more persons entering into a committed sexual union. Ellison responded that he had no problem with such relationships. Indeed, in his book on same-sex marriage Ellison explicitly opened the door to committed sexual unions involving three or more persons concurrently, so long as patriarchal practices were excluded. Since DeLong was strongly supportive of Ellison’s coming, apparently DeLong’s problem with me was not that I made a comparison with adult-committed incest and polyamory but rather that I regarded adult-committed incest and polyamory as bad things.

The oppressive homosexualist environment at Bowdoin is a good example of why should oppose “gay marriage” and other “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” laws. Such laws end up treating those who believe in a male-female prerequisite for sexual unions as the moral equivalent of racists, subject to severe societal ridicule, ostracism, and ultimately termination from employment and criminal prosecution.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.