You wrote:

And when someone like Throckmorton is asking people to avoid Day of Silence to participate in Golden Rule Day, he's specifically saying that violence against LGBT people should be ignored while fighting against forms of violence that affect straight people.

I did not ask anyone to participate in the Golden Rule Pledge (it is not a day - I am encouraging the Facebook group members to have them ready on Monday for the Day of Truth students) in order to avoid the Day of Silence. In fact, many appear to be doing both. The DOS card asks a question and one thing the GRP participants are doing as a reply is to pledge the Golden Rule. I realize that may be a low bar but given the shrill rhetoric that comes from some on the Christian right, it would be an improvement.

You're last statement about ignoring GLBT violence is astonishing given that we are specifically making this pledge in recognition of a Day that calls attention to violence of LGBT people. I am truly sorry you feel that way.

No Comments.
(It is Gay Silence Day)

Most of us know the "Golden Rule": Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. In ethics discussions I have also heard of the "Silver Rule" which is a sort of converse wording: Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you.

Despite its popularity, the Golden Rule can be problematic. You, Alex, point out one such problem such as when helpful souls with good intentions stop you unsolicited and say, "Stand still while I pluck the mote out of thine eye!" When are they being helpful, and when are they being busybodies? There is a certain breadth of spectrum in the way that people want to be treated; some millionaires prefer to pay no taxes whatsoever, and some are happy to pay what they think is their fair share.

The spectrum of things that people don't want to have done to them, generally, is more narrow and clearly defined. Case in point, few would disagree with this statement: "I don't want to be a victim of violence, and I don't want people offering me unsolicited advice about the suitability of my private life."

Alex, although the RR-initiated "Day of Truth" might irk us somewhat, I think it would be wise for us to just let this debate play itself out. Few groups want to be seen as being in favor of violence, and that line about, "I'm sticking my nose in your business because I love you" plays pretty lame in today's secular and libertarian world.

Perhaps Mr. Throckmorton should ask his group to fund a trip to Las Vegas so he can counsel the tourists there on the evils of gambling, drinking, adultery, prostitution, nudity, lust, drugs, etc., etc., etc. Our society has embraced those ills far more casually than it has homosexuality.

And finally, if Mr. Throckmorton approaches me to offer his service at removing the mote in my eye, I will offer to remove the bug that obviously must have crawled up his butt.

Mr. Lopp - I have no interest in your mote.

The DOS participants pass out cards that ask a question - a good one - what are you going to do to end the silence? We are answering in a positive manner. Pretty much that is the crux of the matter.

Mr. Lopp - Your mote is safe.

The DOS participants pass out cards that ask a question - a good one - what are you going to do to end the silence? We are answering in a positive manner. Pretty much that is the crux of the matter.

Well, as I see it, if Silence can get that kind of reaction from those who hate and fear difference then it's doing something right. Because that's the whole point, isn't it? To show the reaction toward those who are different from stereotypical norms. And to that end it works. It shows the hate; it shows the bigotry; it shows the discrimination; and it shows the emotional, spiritual, and physical damage done to both sides in this kind of social warfare. When there is no more heated reactions to things like Day of Silence, Pride Day, marches, and GSAs then we'll no longer need them, will we?

I can see where you're coming from Alex, but I don't think that was Mr. Throckmorton's intent.

The DOS participants pass out cards that ask a question - a good one - what are you going to do to end the silence? We are answering in a positive manner. Pretty much that is the crux of the matter.

If he is to believed (and I have no reason to think he's not), then I think he's intending this to be supplemental to Day of Silence. Not to usurp it, but to support it by actually answering the question in the most Christian answer possible. Perhaps he's trying to show that not all of the Christian community is homophobic and hateful to the LGBT community and, in fact, stand in solidarity.

But I'd like to see Warren confirm this. Otherwise it's just my conjecture.

Bil, your'e the teacher's favorite and I think you are right. So Smote the mote from your eye, and thank you Mr. Gilder---Throckmorton for your good intentions in fighting hatred and creating understanding. Dialogue is everything and just as we would like Barney Frank to dialogue on transgender issues we should commend this hearty schoolmaster for stepping away from the Christain Right. What is the cost to him for doing this and appearing (to some) to be siding with us that violence is never an alternative.

As it is the political time of year I would add that we may not make all the converts we would like, but if we can increase the undecideds we make progress.

Bil - You are correct, that is the intent. One of the Golden Rule participants took the whole thing a bit further and recruited two campus ministries to not only respond with Golden Rule Pledges but some of them remained silent as well. You can read her story at www.wthrockmorton.com.

Warren,

I noticed that post this morning actually when I noticed you'd commented on a different site in regards to my personal favorite homophobe, Kenn Gividen. (There's a long history between us, suffice it to say.) I followed you back to your own site and read the post. If you'd like, we'd be happy to guest post it here - it's a different take that should be interesting to our readers.