Sandy wrote:"Laying an intellectual foundation for pro LGBT advocates to gain momentum in the denomination" is the specific phrase in Andrew Walker's article that prompts my question and comment.
There was a long discussion about the intentions of the conference planners using the conference as a launching pad to get some changes made in CBF policy regarding its position on employing individuals of homosexual orientation. It's just a conference on Baptist views of human sexuality, I was told, not overly focused on LGBT issues, not aimed at, or necessarily connected to CBF. Just some Baptists getting together to talk. And the presenters represented a wide diversity of perspectives, including traditional Christian perspectives, not just one view. Now, in the analysis, I hear one person saying that the foundation for bringing about change on behalf of LGBT advocates within the denomination was a positive result of the conference, and that the slate of presenters was slanted toward one particular position.
In other words, several individuals who are influential in CBF, and who want to see the fellowship reverse its policy regarding hiring individuals of homosexual orientation, called a conference, brought in a slate of like minded presenters, sprinkled with a few people from a more traditional background to give the appearance of fairness, went heavy on the presenters and light on the dialogue, and while putting forward the disclaimer about not being a CBF endorsement, proclaimed the laying of an intellectual foundation to make the kind of changes in CBF they want to see.
Ed: Uh Sandy where was this "long discussion about the intentions of the conference planers using the conference as a launching pad to get some changes made in CBF policy regarding its position on employing individuals of homosexual orientation" ? The current policy is to NOT hire Homosexuals.
And yes we where all told by the sponsors that the conference would not be singularly focused on homosexuality. It was not. But it did seem that most of the presenters did promote the agenda of the homosexual community. There was at least one gay and one lesbian presenter but they where not the only ones promoting the full acceptance of all regardless of sexual orientation. That "they are born that way" seemed to be presented as a given and the possibility of their "having made a choice" was barely mentioned. I never saw the idea that it was not aimed at, or necessarily connected to CBF in any source, where did you find that. I think their may have been a statement that the conference attendance was not limited to CBFers. I have never been to a CBF sponsored event that was limited to CBFers.
In your analysis did you hear "one person saying that the foundation for bringing about change on behalf of LGBT advocates within the denomination was a positive result of the conference, and that the slate of presenters was slanted toward one particular position" or that such seemed to be the case?
And where you start with "in other words" who's words are you paraphrasing? That inference might be taken by some but I have not head or read any one come close to your degree of negative assertions. Keep in mind, I have said the selection of presenters could have been better. And I will now say that in my opinion some of the other ideas presented where every bit as counter to biblical Christianity as homosexuality. I have indicate that it seemed to be pretty standard Alliance of Baptist boilerplate. As I have said in other discussion some of us made a conscience decision two decades ago to go with CBF in lieu of the Alliance. And today I see no reason to rejoin the Alliance.
And Haruo, thank you for your well stated positive reply to Sandy.