# data[].attributes.headline
Post #14: Gay Marriage is Legal, but We're still not Equal

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #14: Gay Marriage is Legal, but We're still not Equal

# data[].attributes.body
This article describes exactly what the title hints at: that it is legal for homosexual couples to marry, but they are still not completely treated as equal to others. How can we work to bring more acceptance to these individuals in our society? What ways have you witnessed homosexuals not being treated as equal?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LAW OF THE LAND?

If someone told me 10 years ago the gay-rights movement would face a fight over baked goods, I would have laughed at them.

As someone who has fought for LGBT equality for the past dozen years, I have seen and heard some of the ugliest, most disgraceful acts of hatred committed against people simply because of who they are, or who they love.

I've heard firsthand accounts of people who have been beaten in the streets, fired from their jobs, turned away from emergency medical care, denied a legal relationship with their own child, refused the chance to say goodbye to their dying partner of 50 years. They've been made to feel low, shameful, and less than human-all because they liked girls instead of boys or boys instead of girls, or their gender identity didn't match the one they were assigned at birth.

We've come a long way since the days when being gay meant a life of complete and utter rejection and social isolation. We can wave rainbow flags and see ourselves represented on television. We can even get married in all 50 states.

We are increasingly seen as human beings with parents and babies and jobs and retirement savings and vacation plans and plaque-fighting toothpaste and all of the hopes and dreams and normalcies as everyone else.

Except we're not the same.

When we're denied services related to our weddings, we don't have full marriage recognition. Being told by the government clerk to go to the next town over to obtain our marriage licenses because she won't issue them to same-sex couples means we don't have full marriage equality. Being told by a public-serving business, including a wedding venue, a baker, or a florist, that they won't provide services for weddings of same-sex couples is another form of marriage discrimination, where same-sex couples continue to get singled out for discrimination.

If someone told me 10 years ago the gay-rights movement would be fighting over the right to get wedding cakes, I would have laughed because the right to marry seemed so far away. Now it is here. The cakes may sound trivial, but the freedom to marry is anything but. And that freedom isn't fully realized until we can obtain marriage licenses like everyone else. It isn't real until we can walk into any business that serves the public with confidence that we won't face the humiliation and stigma of being turned away simply because of who we are.

We need the law on our side. We need the public to understand that while there may be other bakeries that would be willing to serve, fear of discrimination shouldn't be one of the ingredients you have to consider when you choose your wedding cake. The psychological and societal damage that is done when you are denied service that everyone else is free to access-simply because of who you are-is significant. We've said time and again throughout history that we are not a country that condones hate and intolerance, especially against those groups that are marginalized. This no different.

The moments of societal rejection from clerks and businesses are part of the constellation of discrimination that continues to pervade our society. The baker who denies the gay couple their wedding cake. The florist who claims she can't provide flowers for a lesbian marriage. The doctor who turns away a baby with two moms. The emergency room nurse who refuses to treat a transgender person. They all boil down to the same equation: singling someone out because of who they are and denying them service that you would offer to everyone else. In other words, discrimination-pure and simple.

Of course, business owners, just like everyone else in America, have religious freedom; they are free to believe whatever they want, and act on those beliefs. The Constitution always has and always will protect that right. What they cannot do is impose those beliefs on others or use religion to break the law and harm others.

Core religious institutions, on the other hand, remain free to operate according to their religious beliefs. Priests or ministers do not have to marry same-sex couples, just as they don't have to marry previously divorced people if it violates the teachings of their faith. Churches do not have to host any religious marriages to which they object, including marriages of gay couples. The Constitution rightly protects their religious freedom.

But we are now seeing government officials and business owners asserting the right to refuse to follow the law based on their beliefs. That's not religious freedom, that's discrimination-and we should not accept it.

LGBT people are not yet treated the same under the law and in our everyday lives. Many of us are still fired from our jobs for being LGBT, and we lack express protections against such discrimination in nearly two-thirds of the states and at the federal level. Landlords still refuse to rent apartments to gay or transgender people, yet we have little recourse in many states. And a couple filled with elation that they can finally realize the same legal rights as their opposite-sex counterparts can walk into a bakery to order their wedding cake and be told, "We don't serve your kind here."

The fact remains that we're not there yet.

Until the laws catch up and protect us, and the fear dwindles into nothing more than a footnote in a history book, we'll have our work cut out for us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gay Marriage Is Legal, but We're Still Not Equal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LAW OF THE LAND? If someone told me 10 years ago the gay-rights movement would face a fight over baked goods, I would have laughed at them. As someone who has fought for LGBT equality for the past dozen years, I have seen and heard some of the ugliest, most disgraceful acts of hatred committed against people simply because of who they are, or who they love.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses the danger of focusing too hard on finding a marital relationship. It describes why it is okay to be single and quotes, "Rise up, O [singles] of God,
Have done with lesser things.
Give heart, and soul, and mind, and strength
To serve the King of kings"
What are your thoughts on this article? Can you relate to this?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"You're quite wrong," I corrected my friend, "I do believe in purgatory. It's called Christian singleness."

If I thought I meant it merely in jest, the nervous laugh that followed gave me away. I did think singleness was a kind of purgatory. In my experience: most who were there didn't choose to be; if you were there, you prayed to leave soon; and Christians who had escaped constantly reminded you that it's ultimately for your good.

To that point, singleness had been the silent struggle. Any unmet desire for marital love had to be swallowed because, as I often reminded others, Jesus was enough.

But secretly, I was growing tired of being the perpetual third-wheel. I was tired of enduring quiet Friday nights alone. I was tired of watching friend after friend leave their mother, father, and me behind to unite with their spouse. I was tired of feeling like I've fallen through the cracks - even in the body of Christ. And I was tired of hearing the well-intentioned (and even correct) exhortations to be satisfied in the Lord alone - from those who then go home to their wife and children.

So, I lived the next few years searching for her - my good thing (Proverbs 18:22), my lily among brambles (Song 2:2), my jewel, whose worth and beauty would make all of earth's stones blush (Proverbs 31:10). I lived to find her. The faceless she was the prize, the treasure hidden in the field, my heart's alpha and omega.

And, as C.S. Lewis warned, marital love became a demon because I made her into a god. And because God denied me Eve, I, unlike Adam, declared things to be not good. For years I sat in my pious purgatory, feeling confused, alone, and guilty. Why wasn't I more content in Christ alone?

The Mission

But then one night God gently confronted me.

He taught me something so simple, yet so revolutionary: marriage was not my mission. She, in all her glory, was not why I breathed. My life was to be lived for Him, not her. I was commissioned with a higher mission than matrimony.

1. To win souls.

The death of a dating relationship should never devastate us more than the death of the lost. The Great Commission does not deal with lonely souls but lost souls:

"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:18-20)

We have a glorious commission - one from which an "unmarried" status does not disqualify us. Bachelor Baggins, you have a part to play. Darkness surrounds, enemies of the truth amass, and souls slip quietly into hell every day. God's mission is that the nations share our name of "blood-bought child," and this trumps our mission to secure one person sharing our last name.

And ironically, when we labor on his mission, Jesus promises to deal with our lonely souls: "And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

2. To serve Christ's bride.

Jesus died to make his bride resplendent (Ephesians 5:25-27).

We strive to beautify the church because Christ secured her holiness by his blood. Pressing towards this maturity is a group project (Ephesians 4:11-16). We speak the truth in love to build her up, use our gifts to strengthen her, and show otherworldly love towards one another.

3. To worship God and enjoy him.

We can never truthfully tell another sinner, "You complete me." They don't. They can't. They won't.

The elusive he or she is not our pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, not our Oz at the end of the yellow brick road. God has made us for greater love and joy than can orbit around the planet of a finite human being. He has made us for himself. Humanity was not ultimately made to be married to itself but to its God. In his presence is fullness of joy; at his right hand are pleasures forevermore (Psalm 16:11).

All that is lovely in a spouse is but an echo of his loveliness: the beauty of a wife, a faint scent of his beauty; the love and provision of a husband; only a blur of coming realities.

He completes us.

When Marriage Is Not the Mission

And I found that life works better when marriage was not my mission. I discovered the following benefits.

1. More Contentment in Singleness

Contentment didn't come by merely clenching my fists, closing my eyes, and whispering, Jesus is enough, Jesus is enough.

Instead of sitting around trying to talk myself out of loneliness, I got up and went on mission. I grabbed lunch with non-believers, pursued time with Christian brothers, grew in knowledge of his word, and discipled men on campus.

Purposelessness feeds loneliness and makes singleness torture. So, I filled more of my time with what God called me to. Much of what we singles mistake for groanings for marriage is, in my estimation, none other than the soul indigestion of a wasted life. Jesus has bread for your hungry soul that you may not be currently tasting: doing your Father's will by laboring in his harvest (John 4:31-38).

2. More Discernment in Dating

When you are on mission, a partner who is also on mission becomes more attractive. Beauty and charm, finances and athletic prowess all become more and more irrelevant as you embark on mission. Whether your wife was prom queen will not matter when you're heartbroken over one of your brothers walking away from the Lord. Whether your husband can throw a football sixty yards will be inconsequential when you need him to sit down and graciously discipline your children.

Dating becomes a feeder for mission, an enlisting of another for cavalry to charge the gates of hell beside you. Look for someone ferocious for the things of the Lord.

3. More Joy in Living

Paul reminds us that to live is Christ, to die is gain (Philippians 1:21). To live is not to marry. To live is not to raise children. To live is not to find "the one." To live is Jesus Christ. In Philippians 1:23, Paul was hard pressed between the thought of continuing to live on mission (to live) and being with Christ (to die).

Mission was not a purgatory to escape from, but an epic adventure to be a part of. Departure from this journey was only gain because it leads to seeing Jesus face to face.

Rise Up, O Singles of Our God!

Singles, God sees your pain, he knows your loneliness (Hebrews 4:15). He has felt a loneliness that you cannot imagine (Matthew 27:46; cf. Psalm 22:1). He knows your needs before you can even ask him (Matthew 6:8). He knows the current number of hairs on your head and tenderly bids you draw near and cast all your burdens upon his fatherly shoulders (Matthew 10:30; 1 Peter 5:6-7). God cares about your lonely soul.

But there are dragons to slay, souls to win, and darkness to fight (in ourselves and in the world). Although God cares about our lonely soul, we strive towards a larger goal. Rediscover the beauty and urgency of the Christian mission over and above marriage.

The time for fairy tale endings and Prince Charmings is not yet. Don't forsake that childlike anticipation for matrimony because, married or unmarried, none of us has yet experienced the wedding to which all matrimony points. May we sing with William Merrill:

Rise up, O [singles] of God,
Have done with lesser things.
Give heart, and soul, and mind, and strength
To serve the King of kings!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"You're quite wrong," I corrected my friend, "I do believe in purgatory. It's called Christian singleness." If I thought I meant it merely in jest, the nervous laugh that followed gave me away. I did think singleness was a kind of purgatory.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #12: Zach Wahls Speaks about Family

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #12: Zach Wahls Speaks about Family

# data[].attributes.body
This is a video of a student speaking out against House Joint Resolution 6 which would end same sex civil unions in Iowa. He was raised by two mothers and argues that his family is no different from any other family and that he turned out to be quite successful. He asks for equal and fair treatment for same sex couples. What are your initial thoughts on what he says? How do you feel about same sex couples raising a child together?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zach Wahls, a 19-year-old University of Iowa student spoke about the strength of his family during a public forum on House Joint Resolution 6 in the Iowa House of Representatives. Wahls has two mothers, and came to oppose House Joint Resolution 6 which would end civil unions in Iowa.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #11: Erasing Shame: Find Forgiveness for Sexual Sin

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #11: Erasing Shame: Find Forgiveness for Sexual Sin

# data[].attributes.body
This is an extremely helpful article that deals with the topic of shame associated with sexual sin. We are often only taught about the repercussions of having sex before marriage but we aren't taught about how to live with shame and guilt when we do mess up. What are your thoughts on the article? Why does sexual sin feel so much worse than any other sin? How should we cope with it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas." You've heard the slogan, tempting us to believe that there is someplace on earth where we can make mistakes but avoid the consequences. Sin just doesn't work that way. Whether you drive across the country, fly to Australia, turn off all the lights, or push away the memories, the impact of past sin has a way of finding us. There is no arena of life where this is truer than with sexual sin.

I regularly meet women who are haunted by the shame of their sexual choices even decades later. Logically, they should have "moved on." Spiritually, they've heard that they are forgiven. Yet, they can't shake the shame.

At Boundless, many of you have written expressing the pain of feeling forever condemned for premarital sex, pornography, masturbation, having an abortion or other sexual sin:
I'm a Christian college student, and I've struggled with the use of pornography for much longer than I'd like to admit. I began looking 'things' up online because I was curious in my early teens, but couldn't and wouldn't verbalize my questions to my parents because of the shame I felt. I was ashamed for not knowing in the first place and for even wanting to know! I know that God is loving and forgiving, but how can I serve Him when I am marked by such a horrible sin struggle? -Amy I so want to be married and have a husband to love me and have someone that I can love back. This is such a huge desire of my heart, but I struggle with the thoughts of I'm not good enough for that because of the mistakes I've made. Deep in my heart I think I'm being punished by God not allowing me to have a husband and being married. -Brittney
These statements represent what many Christians live with: unshakable shame related to sexual choices.

Shackled by Shame

Shame is a concept that we intuitively know exists but have trouble defining. Is it a feeling? A way of thinking? A state of being? We typically feel guilty about what we have done, but we feel shameful about who we are. Amy and Brittney have drawn conclusions about who they are because of what they have done sexually. Think of it this way: We see shame as the punishment we deserve for something we feel guilty about. We determine that because of our sinful choices, we are less than, deserve to have less than, and are beyond redemption. How has this played out in your life? Go ahead; complete the sentence:

Because I ______, I am ______.

Here is what my friend Allison wrote about the shame from her past that plagued her marriage:
My feelings of guilt and negativity were so powerful. They encompassed much of my private thought life, and Satan had me nearly believing that I was one of the few Christian women who hadn't saved herself for marriage. This belief seemed to take on a life of its own. If I couldn't give my husband my purity, then everything else I did, no matter how much I loved him, was inadequate. I became so fixated on that lie that I began to wonder whether I could ever be the wife my husband deserved.
Are Sexual Sins Unforgivable?

Most women don't battle that kind of shame over a lie they told 10 years ago or for gossiping about a friend. So why do sexual choices seem to create such lasting shame?

First Corinthians 6 seems to suggest that sexual sin is in a "different category" than other sin.

Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, 'The two will become one flesh.' But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.
"Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body" (1 Corinthians 6:15-20, ESV).

Some of what Paul is teaching in this passage is hard to understand. He is describing a strong connection between our sexuality and our spirituality. The point is that sexual choices have spiritual consequences. Recent science evidence supports the holistic impact of our sexuality. There is no such thing as "no strings attached" when it comes to sex. It bonds people together emotionally and spiritually. The images and memories of past sexual experiences can seem seared into your brain.

Because sexual sins are "different" from other sin, we often jump to the unspoken conclusion that they must be unforgivable. Allison expressed it this way:
For years, Satan convinced me that sexual sin is somehow different from other sins - that choices like mine can't be redeemed. I struggled to accept that God's grace extended to my reality. After all, I hadn't been abused. I hadn't been forced to compromise my body. I chose it - and I chose it despite all of the good teaching of my parents and faith. I knew better.
While sexual sins are dangerous and bring a host of potential consequences, they are not beyond God's forgiveness. In fact, the gospels record Jesus often forgiving sexual sins. Many of the women who came to Jesus were in bondage to sexual shame. He not only forgave them, He set them free.

How Do You Find a Forgiven Reality?

Like many other Christians, you may believe that Jesus forgives your sin enough to allow you into heaven, but you must bear the weight of them here on earth. The Father's love is great enough to save you from hell, but not to save you from shame. So you limp along, concluding that you have to settle for God's "plan B" for your life. When the guy you like doesn't call you, you conclude that this is God's way of giving you what you deserve. Or you relegate yourself to a passionless marriage. After all, why would God want you to experience great sex when you are so tainted?

I've got news for you - good news. "It is for freedom that Christ died!" Freedom from shame, freedom from a "plan B" existence, and freedom from your self-condemnation. Like Allison, the truth of God's promises can set you free from the cloud of shame that has become your reality:
God challenged me to find in Scripture even one example of His limiting the gift of forgiveness. I looked and looked, but never found one. Instead, I re-discovered the blessing of boundless grace. God reminded me that His mercies are new every morning, and that reality forced me to believe that God hasn't segmented my sins. The journey to move past my shame has been long: six years into my marriage. I'm still walking the road toward freedom. I have seen the greatest progress during those times when I intentionally focus on who I am as a daughter of the Most High King. In His eyes, I am blameless, free and forgiven. I am beautiful and worthy. His promises and His Word remind me of this truth. They also teach me that God can redeem my broken choices and transform my marriage into one which reflects His love.
God's gift of forgiveness is free, but will cost you something to grab hold of it. The cleansing blood of Jesus is available, but that doesn't mean that it automatically covers you. While Jesus paid a great price for your freedom, walking in it requires something from you:

If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us" (1 John 1:8-10).

Our sins are forgiven and cleansed when we acknowledge them. While you may walk in a constant stupor of shame, that doesn't mean that you have spoken to God about them. This is what king David experienced:

For when I kept silent, my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long. For day and night your hand was heavy upon me; my strength was dried up as by the heat of summer. I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, 'I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,' and you forgave the iniquity of my sin" (Psalm 32:3-5).

Feeling guilty or shameful does nothing to bring freedom or to earn God's favor. God responds to an honest, broken and contrite heart. Have you ever specifically confessed your sin to the Lord, asking for forgiveness? If not, put a stake in the ground right now. Get on you knees before the Lord and pour out your heart with confession. Ask for His forgiveness and thank Him for the precious gift of grace that frees us from hell, but also from shame.

While you cannot find a place on earth to hide from the consequences of sin, there is a reality in which your shame can be erased. Because what happened on the cross didn't stay on the cross, our Father God has promised, "Your sins will be remembered no more."

Copyright 2014 Juli Slattery. All rights reserved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Erasing Shame: Find Forgiveness for Sexual Sin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas." You've heard the slogan, tempting us to believe that there is someplace on earth where we can make mistakes but avoid the consequences. Sin just doesn't work that way.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #10: 'My abuser gave me the attention I craved'

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #10: 'My abuser gave me the attention I craved'

# data[].attributes.body
This is a heart-wrenching account of one woman's experience with sexual abuse. What are your initial thoughts? What factors led to her being sexually abused? What were the implications of this abuse even so many years later?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By the time she was 12, Rachael*, now 44, had been sexually abused repeatedly by two men. But when she tried to tell her parents, they didn't believe her. Here she tells her shocking story.

I'm the youngest of four children and I was always 'Daddy's special girl'. There's a six-year gap between me and my brother Robert, who is number three, so I really was the baby. My late father was a sergeant in the RAF. He was a drinker who didn't contribute to the housekeeping, a very angry man who beat me for misdemeanours such as wandering outside my designated play area, and he
regularly hit my mum. But I loved him in spite of everything. When he wasn't around, I used to
pine for him. He was the only one who ever bought me sweets. Dad could be very caring and loving, but he was unpredictable.

I felt isolated and lonely as a child. My eldest sister was meant to look after me when Mum was working, but she often went out and left me alone. One morning, I went for a walk and got lost. My sisters found me and brought me home and, knowing Dad would beat me, they dressed me up in lots of thick knickers and trousers so I wouldn't feel the blows. I was only five. Sometimes I had to stay off school because of the bruises.

I was six when it happened for the first time. I'd gone out on my sister's bike - she was meant
to be watching me as Mum was at work. As I cycled around strange streets, I heard the sound
of puppies yelping coming from a house by a big green. I stopped in the hope that I'd catch a glimpse of them, and as I went over to the fence I saw these little black balls of fluff in the front garden, and then a man appeared and asked me if I'd like to see them. I said yes. I'd never seen him before but he asked me where my dad was. His message was clear: 'I know you.' He said I couldn't tell anyone I'd been inside his house, and then he started tickling and touching me. Eventually he took me upstairs and lay on top of me.

'I've tried to block the abuse out of my head, but with the Jimmy Savile revelations it has all come flooding back'

I was so frightened because I couldn't breathe. Afterwards he kept saying, 'Don't tell anyone - it's only fun.' Then he cuddled me and said, 'We're friends now,' and I promised to go back to see the puppies. I didn't understand what had happened. I knew it was wrong, but I couldn't tell anyone because I'd have been beaten for straying from my boundary.

My parents split up when I was seven. Mum moved in with a friend and Dad with his new girlfriend Jean, who later became my stepmother. I loathed her, but I wanted to be with Dad, so Mum agreed and Dad was given custody of me while my two sisters and my brother went to live with Mum. Dad had retired from the RAF by this time, having won a lot of bravery medals for his work as a fireman. We had a social worker who used to visit us - every 'broken home' had one in those days - and Jean was sweetness and light when they came, but utterly vile to me normally. She and Dad argued constantly. She told him regularly that he didn't discipline me enough, so I'd get a beating just to appease her. I ran away more and more, sometimes to Mum's, but I'd always get taken back. I became naughty at school because it was the only place I could express the burning anger inside me. I didn't do any of my schoolwork, which I now regret because I was bright and a quick learner.
Dad and Jean drank a lot and we all went to the British Legion club every night in the Midlands town where we lived. I made a friend called Diane who was a year older than me and was also from
a broken home.

A close friend of Dad's who came to the club on Saturdays started walking home with us, and he used to put his arm round my waist when we were going up the hill. I was ten, skinny and not confident. He was about 40 and smelled of beer and cigarettes. Over the weeks, his hands gradually moved to my bottom, but it was so subtle, such a slow process, that by the time I realised what was happening,

I felt awkward and couldn't complain, even though I knew it wasn't right. I remember he came to the swings where we played, calling us his 'favourite girls'. He touched our bottoms and Diane laughed. Diane kept saying, 'Come on Rachael, it's funny,' but I didn't think it was funny. Things progressed from there. He encouraged us to sit on his lap in the billiard room at the club, one girl on each knee, and his touching became more and more intimate. As Dad's close friend he was well protected and
I think he knew we'd never tell. He had such power and I was very scared of him. There were usually others in the room, and whenever I got up to move away from him my knickers twanged where he'd had his hand inside them, and it sounded so loud I remember thinking, 'Everyone heard that,' but no one ever said anything. Dad was too busy drinking at the bar or arguing with Jean to notice where I was. This man asked me to wears skirts, and I begged Mum to buy me jeans to protect myself, but I couldn't explain why I needed them so I never got any. I hated it, but I didn't know how to make it stop. I used to run away and once slept on a slide in a playground. Another time the police found me wandering alone on a motorway.

A few weeks after the abuse began, I decided to broach the subject of men touching girls inappropriately with my stepmother to gauge her reaction. I told her that a man Dad knew had touched my vagina when I was younger. She told me not to tell lies about Dad's friends, and then
told Dad. He got very angry, so I never told anyone again. The abuse by Dad's friend at the Legion
got worse. I was never raped, but I was seriously sexually assaulted, and he kept saying, 'One day you'll be mine.' When I was almost 13, I convinced Dad I was an adult so I wouldn't have to go to the Legion any more. On the odd occasion when I was forced to go, I said 'no' to this man and he stopped, but he'd got away with it for three years. I was so traumatised, I wet the bed until I was 18.
The awful thing about sexual abuse is that victims feel it is their fault. You ask, 'Why me? I
must have done something to encourage it, because it's not happening to other girls.'

I know, rationally, that none of it was my fault, but another voice inside me still says, 'You should never have gone to that house to see the puppies,' and, 'You shouldn't have sat on his lap,' and, 'How did you allow that to happen?' There is a lot of shame and stigma attached to sexual abuse,
so I've never told anyone, apart from Mum a few years ago. She cried and said sending me to live with Dad was the biggest regret of her life. I haven't told my two children. I don't want anyone's pity. I've been married twice, but I find it very hard to trust men. I am very needy and my self-esteem is low. I'm not good at opening up and confiding in people, and I know I try far too hard to please, not just men but at work and with friends.

I wish I could be stronger, different. I still feel dirty after all these years. I've tried to block the abuse out of my head, but with the Jimmy Savile revelations it has all come flooding back. I keep thinking about the thousands of young girls who are still being abused and who never speak out. And the ones who tried to tell people in authority what was happening but, like me, weren't believed. I feel sick now that I allowed my abusers to get away with what they did. A large part of why I didn't tell a teacher or someone else in authority was that I was from such a chaotic background and always wanted everyone to think I was from a normal, loving family.

I received little love as a child, and that's a hard thing to acknowledge. It made it very easy for my abusers to move in on me. If someone says something vaguely critical, I take it to heart. I have never, ever felt safe or secure, and never felt needed by anyone apart from my children.

The sad and unfortunate truth, which I hate with all my heart to acknowledge, is that I felt needed by my second abuser. He gave me the attention I craved. His motives were abhorrent, but I didn't know that at first and by the time I did, I was trapped. This is how sexual abuse happens.

To contact the National Association for People Abused in Childhood, call 0800 085 3330,
or go to napac.org.uk

* some names have been changed

The Savile case: could it happen now? Since the Jimmy Savile scandal broke at the end of September, 300 alleged victims have come forward to say they were abused by the late DJ and TV presenter over several decades, making him one of the UK's most prolific paedophiles. Most of his victims were girls aged 13 to 16, but some were younger and it is believed he may have also abused boys. The abuse wasn't just limited to Savile either: there are also allegations of a paedophile ring operating at the BBC involving a number of other high-profile men.

We're told that things were different back in the 1970s and 80s and that this sort of abuse couldn't happen now. But in May this year, nine men aged between 24 and 59 were convicted of grooming girls as young as 13 for sex and being part of a child exploitation ring in Rochdale. A recent report has revealed that social services and police missed opportunities to stop the sexual abuse of the young girls. It was also revealed that one victim, who was 15 at the time, told police in August 2008 of her abuse by two members of the gang, who would later be jailed for four years. Her complaint was not taken seriously and the abuse continued until December 2008, when she became pregnant and moved away. After the verdicts, the Greater Manchester Police and the Crown Prosecution Service apologised for failing to bring her case to trial following her cry for help.

Attitudes may have changed in some respects since the 1970s, but there are still girls and boys from vulnerable backgrounds who are being abused and their complaints ignored by those in authority. A recent study by the Office of the Children's Commissioner for England found 2,049 confirmed cases of child sexual abuse by gangs and groups in the 14 months to October 2011 - but with the majority of incidents either not being reported or not resulting in criminal proceedings, the actual number of children being abused is likely to be far higher.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'My abuser gave me the attention I craved': One women tells her heartbreaking story of abuse at the hands of her father's friends

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By the time she was 12, Rachael*, now 44, had been sexually abused repeatedly by two men. But when she tried to tell her parents, they didn't believe her. Here she tells her shocking story. I'm the youngest of four children and I was always 'Daddy's special girl'.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #9: Homophobia has no Place in the Church

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #9: Homophobia has no Place in the Church

# data[].attributes.body
This article deals with the occurrence of homophobia in the church. The author encourages people to search their heart and love instead of fear. What is your reaction after reading this article? How do you think the church should regard homosexuality?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Young man, I appreciate your message, but you need to realize that most gay people are dangerous predators."

I had just finished sharing about my experience with same-sex attraction (SSA) at a church in the heart of Wisconsin, and an elderly man tracked me down after the service. These were the first words out of his mouth.

I was taken aback and asked him to clarify. It turns out that a gay man made a pass at him many years ago when he was in the military - and it had caused him to view all gay people as sexually aggressive and dangerous. His view of the homosexual community was defined almost exclusively by a single experience - and fear.

"Homophobia exists, and it has no place in the church."

I have a fear as well, but my fear is that homophobia is all too common, not just in society, but even within the church. Some may object to my use of the word homophobia. It can sometimes be used as a politically loaded term wielded to silence any and all opposition to same-sex sexual activity. However, this is not the root definition of the term.

Simply put, homophobia means a fear of homosexuality and, more specifically, homosexual people. And while it is not the same as loving, biblical opposition to certain behaviors or beliefs, this fear-based attitude often leads to unhelpful stereotypes, prejudice, and even cruel mistreatment.

So, let's call a spade a spade. Homophobia exists, and it has no place in the church.

Search Your Heart

No doubt some who feel convicted will push back. "Well, I don't think that all gay people are dangerous predators, so I'm not homophobic." However, homophobia can often take subtler, equally sinister forms. For example, homophobia can subtly infiltrate not only our beliefs, but also our reasons for these beliefs. These principles themselves might be correct and godly, but they can be believed for all the wrong reasons.

Honestly consider your own heart in the following examples:

Is your belief that same-sex sexual activity is sin based finally on solid biblical exegesis? Or is it really based on the fact that you don't understand how someone could be attracted to the same sex, and this unknown seems to you just plain creepy?

Is your opposition to so-called same-sex marriage based on a principled biblical definition of marriage? Or is it more influenced by a fear that same-sex couples might signal the unraveling of comfortable cultural norms and usher in the end of a once-pristine "Judeo-Christian society"? Or maybe your fear is more that one such couple might move in next door, and you might actually be pressured to befriend them?

Does your opposition to homosexual practice include the ability to lovingly welcome LGBT people into a Sunday service or other gathering with other Christians? Or does opposition for you mean that you wish they would just stay away so you aren't made uncomfortable by their very presence?

In standing for Christian sexual ethics, do you encourage and support those SSA believers within the church who are striving to remain faithful to biblical teaching by welcoming them into full participation in church life? Or does standing for biblical sexuality mean that they can come to church, but they can't grow in influence or serve the body through teaching, and they should probably stay away from the youth group?

Biblical exegesis is a wonderful underpinning for belief, and love is a worthy motive for action. Fear is a horrible reason for both.

It would do us well to humbly examine our hearts to reveal the motives and fears behind our attitudes toward people who identify as "gay." Happily upholding Christian sexual ethics is not the same as harboring animosity toward an entire group of people simply because you find them yucky.

Love, Not Fear

Instead, Christians - of all people on the planet - must operate not out of fear, but love. We recognize that all people are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27) and are therefore sacred and worthy of love.

Furthermore, we are called to love with the very love of our Father (Matthew 5:45), which calls us to love even our enemies (Matthew 5:44-48). Such love casts out fear because it no longer fears God's judgment and therefore is freed to love with lavishness (1 John 4:18).

"When we love in this manner, we expose homophobia for what it really is: pride."

Therefore, our comfort, our convenience, our safety, or our perception of our country's values are no longer valid reasons to operate in any way that is opposed to genuine biblical love. And we love this way because this is exactly how Jesus first loved us (1 John 4:19). He wasn't threatened or repelled by us; he wasn't afraid to enter a relationship with us, sinners that we were (and still are), and to even graciously speak the truth about our sin. Instead, he loved us so lavishly that he died for us to present us clean and whole before his Father (Romans 5:6-8).

When we love in this manner, we expose homophobia for what it really is: pride. It is an attitude that puts beneath us others whose sins and temptations we deem "more depraved" than our own, as we wickedly proclaim with the Pharisee, "Well, at least I don't struggle with that" (Luke 18:11).

The truth is that sin is sin, temptation is temptation, and "men who have sex with men" is listed right alongside greed, drunkenness, deception, and slander as worthy of exclusion from the kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). All equally damnable. Who among us is innocent?

So, let us examine our hearts, identify attitudes of fear and the roots of pride, wherever they exist, and put to death ungodly prejudices that ultimately hinder the truth. In our quest for biblical fidelity, we must not only uphold the truth, but do so in love (Ephesians 4:15).

Biblical love requires that we speak the truth. And when we speak out of homophobia, rather than in love, it is we who are in the wrong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Young man, I appreciate your message, but you need to realize that most gay people are dangerous predators." I had just finished sharing about my experience with same-sex attraction (SSA) at a church in the heart of Wisconsin, and an elderly man tracked me down after the service.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses transgender rights and House Bill 2 that allows for gay or transgender people to be fired from jobs or denied service at businesses simply because of their sexuality. This bill also mandates that establishments can deny transgender individuals the right to use the rest room assigned to their identified gender. The author describes how we as a society need to change the way we view and treat transgender people and that as humans, we all deserve to be treated as equals. They emphasize the importance of education and empathy. What is your reaction to this? Should transgender individuals be denied the right to use the restroom that they identify with? Why or why not?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Trump administration recently repealed an order that allowed transgender students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that coincides with their gender identity. This order, seemingly protected under Title IX, was put in place last year by President Barack Obama. Gavin Grimm, a transgender student from Virginia, has a case headed to the Supreme Court in March. Keeping with the theme of Trump's month-long presidency, WHY ARE WE STILL DEBATING THIS?! Trans rights are human rights. Gender identity and sex aren't the same thing. Transgender people are not dangerous, but they are likely to be harassed; we need to be protecting them, not questioning them. Nobody wants to spend any extra time pulling shenanigans in public restrooms... we all just want to do our business and get out. Let people go where they feel safe, where they feel comfortable. Offer a one-stall unisex bathroom if you can. We've been through this. I wanted to share a piece I wrote for an Opinion Writing class I took last Spring. I wrote about North Carolina's HB2, which, sadly, is still a thing. The point is, we need to get over this made-up bathroom debate. People fear what they don't know, but there's nothing to fear. However, there's so much to be done in order to protect trans rights, and we need to move beyond the bathroom. Education and visibility is so important. We need to learn more and have more conversations with our transgender neighbors and figure out ways we can help them. We need to be calling out those who are discriminating and bullying and perpetuating false information and let them know that they are the ones in the wrong. This was written in April 2016.

The conversation around HB2 is stuck in the bathroom and has been for weeks. It's been in there so long, it's time for someone to check on it and see if it's doing alright.

Maybe you support House Bill Two, which bans transgender people from using the bathroom of the gender they identify with, and instead, they must use the bathroom that coincides with their assigned sex at birth. It allows for gay or transgender people to be fired from jobs or denied service at businesses simply because of their sexuality. HB2 also prohibits local governments and cities from expanding on their non-discrimination policies or loosening these restrictions that HB2 has set in place. Maybe you support that. But can you tell me what part specifically you agree with - the part where discrimination becomes legal, or the part where discrimination becomes legal?

Everyone I've talked to that supports HB2 has the same response: they're worried about sexual assault in restrooms, they're worried about a lack of privacy, they're worried about the violence that will surely occur if we allow transgender people to use the bathroom they choose.

HB2 is terrible, I try to explain to them. It's not just that people can't use the restroom they feel most comfortable in, but also the fact that businesses can deny service or employment to people for being who they are - whether that's someone in the LGBT community, or a veteran, or even a parent.

Blank stare. The supporter crinkles his brow in hesitation, then collects himself and replies, yeah, okay... but I don't want perverts in the bathroom with my wife and daughter!

Let's be clear. Absolutely NO ONE wants perverts in the bathroom. Let's also be clear on another thing: if a pervert is determined to prey on someone in a public restroom, that person will not be swayed one way or another by a law. What was keeping them from doing it before the passing of HB2? To be clear on one last thing, it's still illegal to assault someone.

Even our own governor, Pat McRory, who signed the bill, seems misinformed and unsure about what HB2 means for many people. "This (issue of what bathroom a transgender person should use) is a national debate that's just come on literally in the past three months. No one had heard of this debate before," McRory said on a very awkward interview with "Meet The Press."Just so everyone knows, while there's been more transgender visibility in the media lately, identifying as trans and dealing with all the unclear situations our binary society creates for them is nothing new. McRory dismissed the seriousness of HB2, calling it "basically a restroom privacy bill" but admitting "some parts (of the bill) are poorly thought out."

Everyone seems focused on the bathroom aspect of HB2. Supporters seem especially fixated, but it seems like those who oppose it are feeding into the made-up hype as well. This has been evident to me by the influx of posts I see daily on Facebook from both sides. Supporters of HB2 have imagined these ridiculous scenarios where transwomen prey on cisgendered women and children in the restroom. This simply doesn't happen. Transwomen are the ones who worry about being assaulted and verbally abused in the restroom, especially if they are being forced to use the men's room. "The new law forces many trans people to choose between breaking the law or going into restrooms where they face the possibility of discrimination and violence," said Renee Wells, Director of the GLBT center at North Carolina State University. "The new law has also helped to create a climate in which people may feel more empowered to voice and act on their transphobia, which only serves to increase the anxiety and fear that trans youth face in public spaces."

For weeks, I have seen the outrageous memes floating around Facebook and other social media. I saw a cartoon of a bearded man in a loose-fitting dress with a camera walking into a restroom, smiling mischievously at a horrified woman and child - he had a speech bubble that read, "Don't worry lady, I'm transgender!" So much propaganda has been circling around that it creates fear of ridiculous situations. Those who protest the bill have been circulating viral messages online too, simplifying the problems of HB2 down to "Do you really want her in the men's restroom?" (featuring the picture of a heavily made-up and voluptuous transwoman) and "Do you really want him in the women's restroom?" (picture of a scruffy, bearded, muscular transman). This type of message is not helpful either - it makes it seem like those in the transgender community who do not "pass" as the gender they identify with are not as deserving of rights. All of these posts are giving us the wrong idea about HB2, and distracting us from the real issue of legalized discrimination, and the consequences of vilifying groups of people, ostracizing them from society with harmful associations.

"The arguments being used to rationalize the bathroom provision associate laws that provide protection and inclusion for the transgender community with the threat of predatory behaviors and sexual violence, which can create a climate in which people who observe someone that they perceive to be transgender as someone who may also pose a threat of sexual violence," said Wells. "The psychological effect of having your identity invalidated and pathologized - and of having that be a dominant cultural conversation in the society in which you live - could cause trans youth to internalize harmful messages that damage their self-esteem, cause depression, lead to thoughts of self-harm, and may ultimately increase suicide attempts, which already impact 41% of the transgender population."

Supporters of the HB2 love to talk about what horrific scenarios possibly go on in a public restroom, and those who oppose it love to respond and feed into the drama. Using the restroom at one's will is a pretty basic human right, and this aspect of the bill is certainly worthy of conversation and concern. But it's become a screaming match (or a pissing contest, if you will). Everyone is set in their ways. No one is being helped, but many are getting hurt.

If we're going to talk about HB2 and convince people that it is wrong, we need to get past the bathroom thing. Yes, it's an absolutely awful injustice, but we need a new angle.

"Right now we need to be intentional about helping people to better understand identity, how it develops, how diverse it is, how narrow our identity constructs are, and how those narrow constructs create problematic expectations for all of us, not just members of the transgender community," said Wells. "We also need to do more to prepare educators and social service providers to understand the systemic barriers and oppressions that trans youth face, the specific needs they have as a result, and how best to support them."

It's insane to think that in 2016, a business could put a sign up on its door that stated that a group of people wasn't allowed to come in and that sign would be protected under the law. I feel like we're regressing back to times of racial segregation. That wasn't okay for blacks then, and it's not okay for the LGBT community now. From our past mistakes of dividing people - from slavery to the Holocaust to having "white" and "colored" water fountains - haven't we come to the conclusion that we're all human? We may be different, but we all deserve to be treated as equals. Empathy and education are keys if we want to get people on board with impacting change and flush HB2 down the toilet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Trump administration recently repealed an order that allowed transgender students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that coincides with their gender identity. This order, seemingly protected under Title IX, was put in place last year by President Barack Obama. Gavin Grimm, a transgender student from Virginia, has a case headed to the Supreme Court in March.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #7: Men Who Make Virginity Pledges Struggle with Sex Once Married

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #7: Men Who Make Virginity Pledges Struggle with Sex Once Married

# data[].attributes.body
This article describes how men who abstain from sex until marriage sometimes struggle with sex once they are married. These men are often taught that sex outside of marriage is animalistic and foul, but sacred within a marriage and this leads them to be confused and lost when the times comes. How should we, as Christians, teach the transition from "sex is bad" to "sex is holy"?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Credit: Yuriy Rudyy | Shutterstock.com

SAN FRANCISCO - Men who make virginity pledges get strong social support to abstain from sex before the wedding night, but that backing disappears soon after they tie the knot, new research suggests.

These men are also taught to think of sex outside of marriage as animalistic and foul, but sacred within a marriage, according to a new study presented Aug. 17, here at the 109th American Sociological Association meeting.

As a result, male virginity pledgers can be somewhat confused and lost when it comes to sex after marriage, said study researcher Sarah Diefendorf, a sociology doctoral candidate at the University of Washington in Seattle. [ The 10 Most Surprising Sex Statistics]

"They spend the first 20-something years of their lives being told that sex is wrong," Diefendorf told Live Science. "They're expected to make this transition from the beastly to the sacred, but they don't really have the tools to be able to do that effectively."

Staying pure

Overall, virginity pledges fail to keep young men and women from having sex, research has shown. But most studies of the chastity vows looked at mass-pledging events, such as the Silver Ring Thing, where throngs of teens at a concert-like venue make a vow to abstain from sex until their wedding days. Small, focused groups who make virginity pledges have a better track record of keeping that promise, Diefendorf said.

Some of purity culture's most visible aspects are aimed at women: At purity balls, girls as young as 3 years old pledge their virginity to their fathers until marriage, while abstinence-only curricula liken women who have premarital sex to chewed-up pieces of gum. But in Christian evangelical subcultures, men take virginity pledges, too, Diefendorf said. [ Sex Ed, Abstinence and Contraception (Infographic)]

Strong support

To help men stick to these vows, many churches set up small groups, where men help each other as they struggle with temptations like pornography, masturbation and premarital sex.

In 2008, Diefendorf first conducted several interviews with men in one such small group, called The River, which was formed at the Message of Truth, a nondenominational mega-church in the Southwest. The group of 15 men met weekly to support each other in their struggles to remain abstinent, and many became close friends.

"They have these unbelievably honest and open conversations about sex and sexuality and various struggles with that," Diefendorf told Live Science.

The men also created an intricate system of accountability to one another, with members texting each other phrases such as "Are you behaving?" to make sure other pledgers weren't viewing porn, masturbating or engaging in illicit sexual behavior.

In the dark

But by 2011, when Diefendorf returned, 14 out of 15 of the men had married, and the church group had disbanded. Though the men remained friends, they didn't discuss sex.

"The church teaches, before marriage, keep it in the light - they want these men to be talking about these issues so that they maintain their pledges," Diefendorf said. "But post-marriage, the church teaches: keep it in the dark."

Most of the men said they viewed discussing their sex lives as inappropriate and disrespectful to their wives. But the men also felt uncomfortable talking directly to their wives about sexuality, and said they wished the church would provide more guidance after marriage, Diefendorf said. Some still struggled with a desire for extramarital sex or pornography, but didn't have an outlet to discuss it, she added.

The upshot was that, though their marriages may be happy and healthy overall, "when it comes to their sex lives, that's where they are struggling," Diefendorf said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Men Who Make Virginity Pledges Struggle with Sex Once Married

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SAN FRANCISCO - Men who make virginity pledges get strong social support to abstain from sex before the wedding night, but that backing disappears soon after they tie the knot, new research suggests. These men are also taught to think of sex outside of marriage as animalistic and foul, but sacred within a marriage, according to a new study presented Aug.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #6: Parents Cast Fight as Sexual vs. Religious Tolerance

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #6: Parents Cast Fight as Sexual vs. Religious Tolerance

# data[].attributes.body
This is an article about parents who requested that their son be removed from the classroom when topics regarding homosexuality  are discussed to ensure his "spiritual safety". The school argues that it is their job to expose children to a world of diversity.  They mention they must be tolerant of children and parents of all backgrounds while the father questions where his tolerance it.  Does learning about homosexuality endanger our spiritual safety?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Massachusetts father is a hero to people angry at what they call schools' 'gay agenda.'

LEXINGTON, Mass. - David and Tonia Parker are asking their neighbors in this liberal town for one consideration:

Tolerance.

The Parkers believe homosexuality is immoral. So they were appalled when their son brought a picture book home from kindergarten that showed families with same-sex parents.

To ensure his "spiritual safety," they demanded the right to pull him out of class whenever homosexuality was discussed.

To deny them that right, they say, would be intolerant of their faith.

School administrators offer a different take on tolerance.

They say it's their job to expose children to the world's diversity.

Supt. Paul B. Ash refuses to whisk the Parkers' son away if a classmate with same-sex parents brings a family photo for show-and-tell, or a lesbian couple volunteers at the Halloween party.

Similar debates have roiled communities across the nation as conservative parents challenge classes, books and after-school activities that they say promote a one-sided view of homosexuality as normal. They have notched victories in several states.

But the dispute here has gone further than most.

David Parker has been banned from school property. Ash has been flooded with hate mail from across the country. There have been protests and counter-protests; the local newspaper received so many letters, many condemning the Parkers as bigots that the editor stopped printing them.

Ash talks of the school's obligation "to be more than tolerant" to children and parents of all backgrounds.

Parker asks: Where's the tolerance for him?

"Real respect, real tolerance, is not pushing your beliefs on other people," Parker said. "What people do in their bedroom, that's their business. What they tell my children in school about these subjects -- that's my business."

Parker, 43, was so upset at the response to his demand that he refused to leave after a meeting with administrators at Joseph Estabrook School in April.

Police arrested him. Parker declined to post bail and spent the night in jail; his trespassing trial is set for today. For now, the district has banned him from school property.

Parker has become a celebrity among social conservatives dedicated to fighting what they call "the gay agenda" in schools.

That movement is gaining steam, partly because polls indicate that teenagers are much more likely than the public at large to favor same-sex marriages and gay adoptions. Some conservatives see that as alarming proof that public schools are "indoctrinating" children.

They blame events such as the Day of Silence, when students in thousands of middle and high schools remain silent to express solidarity with gay and lesbian classmates. They also protest what they see as subtler messages, such as library books featuring gay and lesbian characters.

Several websites offer parents advice for challenging neutral or positive material about gays and lesbians in schools. One tip: Demand equal time for presentations from "ex-gays" who have gone straight. Another: Assert that homosexuality is not a valid example of diversity because it's a lifestyle choice, not an inborn trait.

Using such tactics, parents in Montgomery County, Md., recently blocked a health curriculum that allowed teachers to initiate discussions of homosexuality. In Lawton, Okla., parents stopped plans for a student Gay-Straight Alliance.

The Parkers say they never expected to be on the front line of this cultural war.

They moved here a year and a half ago, when Parker's company relocated his division from New Jersey. (He declined to give his firm's name or his job description out of fear of bringing the controversy into his workplace.)

This town of 30,000, about 10 miles northwest of Boston, is overwhelmingly liberal. In the 2004 election, Sen. John F. Kerry won 72% of the vote here; four years earlier, Al Gore took 64%.

Still, the Parkers said they did not feel out of place with their conservative social values. They hung a cross by the front door, and settled in, delighted with the kindergarten curriculum.

But on Jan. 17, their son brought home a "diversity tote bag." (It was supposed to be an optional activity, but Tonia, 36, said she never saw a notice telling parents they could choose not to participate.)

The tote held recipes for ethnic dishes, puppets with varying shades of skin -- and the book "Who's in a Family?," which includes a picture of a lesbian couple washing a poodle with their children. By presenting households with same-sex parents as a normal family grouping, David Parker said, the school "disenfranchises" anyone who holds opposing values.

His adversaries respond that far more people would be hurt if Parker's demands were met.

Imagine, they say, how bewildered a child of same-sex parents would feel if a classmate had to be escorted from the room whenever she mentioned her family. Imagine how her parents would feel if they had to take turns attending class events to avoid being seen as a couple.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Parents Cast Fight as Sexual vs. Religious Tolerance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Massachusetts father is a hero to people angry at what they call schools' 'gay agenda.' LEXINGTON, Mass. - David and Tonia Parker are asking their neighbors in this liberal town for one consideration: Tolerance. The Parkers believe homosexuality is immoral.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #5: 10 Responses to the Phrase Man Up

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #5: 10 Responses to the Phrase Man Up

# data[].attributes.body
This is a spoken word poem in which the artist offers ten responses to the phrase "man up". He touches on topics regarding gender roles and stereotypes and the tendency of society to encourage boys to be tough and have no feelings. What is your response to the video? Why do you think no one ever says to "woman up"? How does the "man up" phrase affect violence, mental health issues, and suicide? WARNING: There is some profanity!!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kyle "Guante" Tran Myhre - Ten Responses to the Phrase 'Man Up'

# data[].attributes.body
This is a short article in which the author openly discusses her confusion regarding her sexual preference. She says, "Confused is a sexuality in itself". She is accepting of her confusion and believes eventually she will end up where and with whom she is meant to be. What are your thoughts on this article? Is it okay to be confused about your sexuality?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I recently watched an infuriating debate between Jordan Peterson and a Channel 4 host. Jordan Peterson is a Canadian doctor and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. He is also a public speaker and, in my opinion, a misogynist.

In listening to this debate, I have no doubt that this man and I would not get along. He completely generalized all women claiming them to be more agreeable than men and that is why the pay gap exists. To summarize, he is claiming that the personality of women is what causes them to be paid less than their male counterparts. Women are nice and men are not. Therefore, women deserve to be paid less than men. He then goes on to claim that women choose careers that pay less than men. However, he completely ignores the systematic history of women being forced into "feminine" careers such as clerk-work while men have always been applauded for chasing larger aspirations.

Next, he goes on to say that women are forced to grow up quicker than men because they have to build families before men do...

First of all, all women are different. Some women want children, while others do not. There are also other ways to go about building a family without a woman getting pregnant. The greatest issue that I have with his statement, though, is that he is claiming that women are in charge of the family. If women need to get their lives together earlier, as he is claiming, then by default he is also arguing that men do not have as much responsibility to the family as a woman does. This is misogynistic, it is limiting the male role as an equal parent and placing the role of caregiver on only the woman. He is assuming the 1950s-esque ideal of a woman in the house while the man earns the income.

His tone is so patriarchal and condescending towards his female counterpart. He calls her non-agreeable, and claims that is a masculine trait. Essential, Jordan Peterson is telling women that to be successful they need to be more like men as "smart, conscientious, and tough." This is so infuriating. If women and men are doing the same job, then they should receive the same pay without battling and assuming masculine traits.

He keeps going back and forth about what he is claiming. He claims women need to be smarter, but then claims that women are just as smart as their male counterparts. He is literally arguing that female traits are not desirable in the workforce. If you want to be successful, you need to be either a man, or act like a man. To be your own (generalized) self, you need to ignore all "feminine" traits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
It's Okay To Be Confused About Your Sexuality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I recently watched an infuriating debate between Jordan Peterson and a Channel 4 host. Jordan Peterson is a Canadian doctor and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. He is also a public speaker and, in my opinion, a misogynist.

# data[].attributes.body
I found this diagram very interesting. It points to different areas of the body as the source of its label. For example, gender in the brain and orientation in the heart. It also provides various spectrums at the bottom for each label. To what degree do you agree or disagree with this diagram?

# data[].attributes.body
This article describes the incompetence of current sex and relationship education (SRE) programs in school. It states that today's young generation "has been exposed to low self-esteem, homophobia, bullying, unhealthy relationships and poor sexual health as a result of the lack of quality SRE in our schools." Is this surprising? Why are schools not giving effective education about sexuality? Lastly, should schools include matters such as sexual violence, rape, LBGT relationships, masturbation, and others factors of sexuality outside of simple anatomy? Why or why not?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Three-quarters of young people are not taught about sexual consent, while one in seven said they did not receive any sex and relationship education (SRE) at all, and 95% said they were not taught about LGBT relationships, according to a report from the Terrence Higgins Trust.

The survey of young people by the HIV and sexual health charity said infrequent and poor-quality sex and relationship education in schools was creating a "safeguarding crisis" for young people.

The findings are in line with an Ofsted report in 2013, which found that SRE teaching was inadequate or required improvement in 40% of schools.

Where SRE is taught, Tuesday's report found, young people said it was usually limited to biological topics such as reproduction, body parts and heterosexual sex.

The survey, called Shh ... No Talking warned that SRE is "unfit" for the smartphone generation, leaving them vulnerable to abuse, bullying and poor mental and sexual health.

Ian Green, the chief executive of the Terrence Higgins Trust, said: "In this report, we've seen the stark reality of SRE in this country and heard saddening stories of how one generation of young people have been exposed to low self-esteem, homophobia, bullying, unhealthy relationships and poor sexual health as a result of the lack of quality SRE in our schools.

"The government's quiet blocking of compulsory SRE will condemn another generation of young people to leave school armed with little to no information on issues like LGBT relationships, gender identity and consent.

"Without trusted information from schools on anything other than the biological basics of heterosexual sex, young people will turn to less reliable sources such as the internet or their peers as they navigate life outside the classroom."

In February, the government refused to make SRE compulsory, against the advice of parents, educators, the education select committee and young people themselves. The women and equalities select committee, which is looking into how to tackle sexual violence, harassment and bullying in schools, has found overwhelming support for SRE and personal, social and health education (PSHE) to be made mandatory in schools.

Other findings in the charity's report include:

Half of more than 900 respondents aged 16-24 rated the SRE they had received as "poor" or "terrible".

Just 10% of respondents rated it "excellent" and 2% rated it "good."

Just 5% of young people who said they received SRE were taught about LGBT sex and relationships, while 97% believed it should be LGBT-inclusive.

About 97% of those who said they received SRE did not recall gender identity being taught and 89% were not taught about sex and pleasure.

61% said they received SRE just once a year or less.

32% of respondents did not remember receiving any information on HIV in schools, while 27% said they did not receive any information on HIV.

99% of young people surveyed thought SRE should be mandatory in schools.

At the moment, SRE is only mandatory in state-maintained secondary schools, which account for 40% of all schools. Academies, primary schools, free schools and private schools are not obliged to teach it.

Green said it was "shocking" that Department for Education guidance on SRE had not been updated for 16 years.

"Young people are getting information about sex and relationships in a world before social media existed, before smartphones, before equal marriage or civil partnerships," said Green. "It is wholly unfit to prepare them for the realities of sex and relationships in 2016."

Paul Bishop, an assistant headteacher and director of sixth form at Saint Cecilia's school in Wandsworth, south-west London, said: "It seems everyone thinks SRE is someone else's job. The result is an information vacuum which leaves children and young people reliant on inaccurate or unrealistic depictions of sex and relationships from alternative sources, such as their peer groups and social networks."

Lauren Alexandra Young, 18, who took part in the survey, said: "My SRE consisted of watching a cartoon video of a heterosexual couple, labelling the male anatomy and learning how pregnancies occur. We weren't taught about sexual intercourse, other contraception, health relationships or even periods.

"Many young people struggle with their feelings of sexuality and gender and if no one is talking to them about it, or allowing them to discuss it openly, they will internalise their worry and it will grow into something ugly and harmful for the individual."

A total of 914 young people aged 16-25 completed the survey, which was online for seven weeks in February.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: "High quality sex and relationship education (SRE) is a vital part of preparing young people for life in modern Britain - helping them make informed choices, stay safe and learn to respect themselves and others. Our guidance is clear that young people, whatever their sexuality, need to feel that sex and relationships education is relevant to them and sensitive to their needs.

"We also expect all school to deliver PSHE to a high standard. We know that the vast majority of schools and teachers recognise the importance of PSHE, and trust teachers to tailor their lessons to best suit their pupils. We are focusing on raising the quality of PSHE teaching and working with leading headteachers and practitioners to look at how best to achieve this."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sex education in schools 'unfit' for smartphone generation, survey finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Three-quarters of young people are not taught about sexual consent, while one in seven said they did not receive any sex and relationship education (SRE) at all, and 95% said they were not taught about LGBT relationships, according to a report from the Terrence Higgins Trust.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #1: Teaching our Children about Sex

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #1: Teaching our Children about Sex

# data[].attributes.body
This is a link to an article that answers the question of if it is Biblical to teach children about sex. She offers specific examples from the Bible and her own personal opinion.
What are your initial thoughts of the article? Does it coincide with what the textbook (Authentic Sexuality) talks about? If yes, how? If no, how not?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The topic is one that makes some (nearly all?) parents "gulp" and feel a little nervous.

Do we really have to talk about it?

How do we talk about it?

What should we/shouldn't we say?

What if we say too much?

What if we don't say enough?

What if we say the wrong thing?

Are we going to mess them up for life?

And then as Christians, there's another question that sometimes plagues parents: Is it even BIBLICAL to teach our kids about sex?

There are many reasons for this, but let me tell you my simple answer: YES.
My husband and I believe:

it is right,

it is wise,

it is loving,

it is our job

AND- it is biblical

to teach our children about sex.
It is about that last point- that it is biblical - that I want to elaborate today.

REASON #1- GOD TALKED EXPLICITLY TO HIS "KIDS" ABOUT IT.

God didn't just leave His children to flounder. When He gave them the Law in the Old Testament, He laid out very clear, specific guidelines about what was good and what was wicked, in regard to sexuality.

God's Old Testament Law specifically addressed:

pagan practices of the culture around them

incest, with very specific situational applications (i.e., not your aunt, not your father's adopted daughter, etc.)

sex during menstrual cycles

sexual religious rituals (condemning these)

prostitution

rape

homosexuality

beastiality

And in the New Testament, Paul offered very specific instructions as well, regarding (among other things):

fornication

homosexuality

lust

orgies

adultery

God could have just said, "sex is for marriage," and left it at that. Right?

But He didn't.

He gave very specific instructions about things they might encounter in their lives so that they would not be caught unaware or uncertain about what to do in a given situation. God wanted His children to be very distinctive and discerning in the area of sexual things, and so He gave them specific instructions.

Discernment does not come in fogginess or confusion. The way for our children to learn to be discerning is for them to hear about God's perspective on sexuality from us.

REASON #2- GOD COMMANDED HIS CHILDREN TO "TEACH" THESE THINGS TO THEIR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN...

"Now, Israel, listen to the statutes and ordinances I am teaching you to follow... teach them to your children and grandchildren." (Deuteronomy 4)

"These words that I am giving you today are to be in your heart. Repeat them to your children. Talk about them when you sit in your house and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up." (Deuteronomy 6)

REASON #3- ... AND WE ARE GIVEN SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF THEM DOING SO...

We are given examples of EVERYONE hearing these things read.

"Moses summoned all Israel and said to them, 'Israel, listen to the statutes and ordinances I am proclaiming as you hear them today. Learn and follow them carefully.'" (Deuteronomy 5:1) Remember all the things in the list above and consider that all ages of Israelites would hear about these sexual practices, discussed from God's perspective.

Jesus taught the masses about lust, adultery, and sexual immorality.

Paul's New Testament letters were read aloud to the churches as they were received.

There is no indication that people 18 and under were separated out and left in the dark about these instructions, nor that certain parts were left unread until children were occupied elsewhere.
No, in fact, I believe the opposite is true. The examples we see are of "all of Israel" and "all the church" gathering to hear these things taught. The examples of Jesus' teaching in the Gospels show children mixed right in with the adults as people were taught.

REASON #4- ...NOT JUST IN GROUPS, BUT ONE-ON-ONE.

We also have the example of Solomon teaching sexual wisdom and discernment to his son. In Proverbs 5-7, in the midst of a heap of wisdom, he specifically warns his son:

about the forbidden woman (5:3, 5:20)

about her words (5:3)

what is the result of being with her (5:4)

where her path leads (5:5-6)

not to go near her door (5:8, 7:25)

that though her fees are low (6:26), a prostitute will drain his resources, steal his vitality, consume his body (5:9-11, 6:26)

that at the end of his life he will lament going near her (5:11)

that he will be entrapped, entangled, die, and be lost because of his own sin, lack of discipline, and stupidity (5:22-23)

that if he listens to "his fathers' commands" and his "mothers' teaching" (6:20- notice: both parents are instructing him in these things), he will be protected from the evil woman (6:24)

that he must choose not to lust or be captivated by her (6:25)

that he must never sleep with another man's wife, or he will be punished (6:29)

that committing adultery will destroy him (6:32)

with a specific example- sharing that he has personally observed a young man who lacks sense who went close to the prostitute's house (7:6-9)

the times, specifics, and details of this liaison... he tells his son about her clothes, her location, her volume, her persistence, her kisses, her forwardness, her words, her promises, her bed coverings, her enticements, her flattery... not in order to pique his curiosity, but in order that his son may wisely avoid the situations, times, places, and lies that would lead to his encountering and foolishly believing a prostitute (7:8-27)

the commonness and ease with which the prostitute takes victims (7:26)

He also specifically instructs his son:

to "drink water from his own cistern" (5:15- meaning, to be satisfied by his own wife)

that sexual things are not for public, not for strangers (5:16, 5:20)

that he is to take pleasure in the wife of his youth (5:18)

that her breasts are to always satisfy him (5:19)

that he is to be lost (the only time in the Bible it is commendable to be "drunk") in her love forever (5:19)

that the pursuit of wisdom will keep him from sexual seduction (7:5)

Now, just let your eyes glance down those lists, and take note:

How long is the list of negative warnings?

How specific is it?

If you take that list and overlay it with common modern-day sexual sin, how explicit do you think we should be about addressing God's perspective on the sins of our era?

SO, WHAT DO WE (PERSONALLY) DO?

For our part, Doug & I have (for years) tried to live intentionally in this area, where we talk (at age-appropriate levels) with our children about the things they know about (perhaps from reading through stories in the Old Testament, or from situations in real life) or will soon encounter in their lives. (In a future article, I will share specifics about what these conversations have looked/sounded like, and what resources we've found beneficial as we talk through these things with our children.)

We do so because:

We want them to understand God's perspective on sex.

We want to proactively frame their understanding and help shape their choices, rather than reactively addressing misunderstandings and entanglements with sin.

We believe that it is loving of us to warn our children about challenges that we know are almost certainly ahead of them. (If we knew that they would soon be traveling along a jagged and dangerous cliff we've already traversed, where injury and death are possible or even likely, we would certainly give them specific details and warnings about the dangers they will face.)

We believe that God was open with His children about these things, and we should be, too.

We believe it is biblical to talk to our kids about God's perspective on everything (sex included) so that they will grow in the fear and admonition of the Lord.

Do you believe it is wise to talk with our children about sex, and (as they grow) about the lure of sexual sin?

Do you currently (at an age-appropriate level) give God's perspective to your children about sex & the sexual sins of our culture?

Also-

This is going to be a revisited topic for the next few weeks (months?) as I share specifics of how we've handled this so far, and what wisdom we've gathered from God's Word and from other believers in this area. So-

Please comment with any specific questions/thoughts you'd like to see addressed in future installments.

RELATED POSTS:

Subscribe to my newsletter, and I'll send monthly encouragement -- full of truth and grace for moms. SIGN UP, SO WE CAN KEEP IN TOUCH:

God's timing amazes me sometimes. My husband and I were just discussing this very thing. We have a 3 1/2 year old daughter, and an 18 month old son (number 3 is due to arrive late Feb!). This was something that my parents did well during my childhood (as far as marital relations) but my husband was left to learn on his own. Unfortunately, neither of us were taught anything about sexual sin outside of fornication, or adultery.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is It Biblical to Teach Our Kids About Sex? - Jess Connell

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The topic is one that makes some (nearly all?) parents "gulp" and feel a little nervous. Do we really have to talk about it? How do we talk about it? What should we/shouldn't we say? What if we say too much? What if we don't say enough? What if we ...