St. Joseph’s University’s Gay Advocacy Group

[email protected]

The Unholy AllianceA manipulative and biased case study aimed at undermining and subverting the Christian morals and Biblical beliefs of the Faithful for the sake of Political Correctness

What exactly is the Alliance at SJU? You may think you know the answer to that but you don’t. The Alliance (formerly COSASM) is the brain-child and pet project of Dr. Lourene Nevels, Director of the Counseling Center; Mr. Richard O’Malley, Associate Dean of the University College; and Vincent Genovesi, professor of Theology. This “case study” was initiated in the early 1990s with the expressed goal of forcing the acceptance of homosexuality on SJU’s campus. Periodically over the past decade or so the SJU representatives to the Bannan Center in Chicago, Illinois would submit a written report on how “successful” they were in getting students to agree with homosexuality and other alternative lifestyles. Drafted like a scientific report, it details the “goals”, “early successes and failures”, “learnings” (a clever way of expressing how they may better circumvent challenges and Church doctrine in the future) and the “conclusion”. As I look over it, it would be humorous if it weren’t so true. Students are being used as guinea pigs in this “study” and they hardly know it. If it seems that SJU has gone “pro-rainbow” lately, it is no accident. This has been a well-orchestrated, concerted effort on behalf of dissident “Jesuits” with support from some radically liberal faculty. Every lecture, discussion group and the littering of the Hawk with pro-gay propagandist letters has been well-intentioned with this case study in mind. Here are just a few of the projects that the Alliance case study examines: “Gay and Proud”, “Gay and Catholic”, “Being Jewish and Gay”, “Hooking Up” (wonderful Jesuitical example), “Always Our Children”, “Masculinity and Intimacy”, “Conversion Therapy,” ” Crimes Against Nature,” “Margaret Farley lecture on sexual ethics,” “AIDS quilt in campus chapel,” “Coming Out On Campus,” “Jeannine Gramick lecture on Catholic Teaching,” “Support letters in the student newspaper (e.g. in response to the murder of Matthew Shephard).” I could go on even more and I didn’t even get to “Rainbow Week” events.

According to the case study, “It is desirable to maintain independence from the administration (for one thing, this gives them ‘deniability’…” “We have tried to prepare relevant administrators for programs that may be controversial. At the same time we keep in mind the old slogan of religious formation: ‘It’s easier to get forgiveness than permission.'” Well, that’s something to remember for the sacrament of penance. I have been told by an apologist for the Alliance that its purpose is to merely bring up discussion on topics of sexuality and that “discussion is not advocacy,” I quote directly. This is a blatant lie. The written case study states, “We have often been forced to have opposing voices represented in our programs for the sake of ‘balance’. This is especially true if a speaker is taking a line that appears to conflict with Church teaching. Sometimes this has been all to the good, but not always.” The discussion about “Conversion Therapy” included two speakers both in opposition. Admitting their bias, it is explicitly stated, “We did not bring in someone who believes people can and therefore should change their sexual orientation, because we do not see that as a credible position.” If this isn’t advocacy, I don’t know what is. This kind of bias would leave a student believing conversion was impossible, although I know for a fact it happens quite often. Visit born-again, former-homosexual Stephen Bennet’s website You may have seen him on The O’Reilly Factor, as well. This manipulative project also recounts a time when they silenced the College Republicans and their invited guest, Paul Cameron, by having their literature removed by Student Life because, according to the Alliance representatives, it was ” ‘hate literature’, in our opinion.” We’re reaching a dangerous point where anything not “gay-friendly” or “politically correct” is “hate literature”. If the previous declarations weren’t disturbing enough, the case study admits, “Members of a group like the Alliance do not tend to be moderates on the issue of seeking justice for members of sexual minority groups. They tend, rather, to be people who want to ‘push the envelope’.” That’s exactly what a “Christian” University needs, people who want to push the envelope on moral decency.

I am sure there will be those who will say that I am taking things “out of context”, but I was not allowed to reprint a seven page report for obvious reasons. Therefore, to rebut the naysayers and apologists, anyone who would like their very own copy of the Alliance case study may e-mail their name and address to the Hawk, which may forward it to me. Postage is free of charge and on me. Unlike some in positions of influence, I trust students with the truth-the whole truth. Now for my two cents…

The prevailing dissenting, heterodox, liberal ideology would have you think that you must “accept” homosexuality as a viable lifestyle as opposed to “tolerate” it. In a free society all we must do is tolerate one another, not accept everything under the sun for the namesake of being “modern” or politically correct. This case study fails to acknowledge or call for the toleration of religious views. For example, accepting homosexual behavior would violate not only the beliefs of devout Catholics but millions of Bible-believing Christians and devout Muslims and Orthodox Jews. Sadly, the liberal elite believe “open-mindedness” means being open only to their minds. The saddest propaganda I’ve read was the “milking” of the Matthew Shephard murder. All murders are wrong and sinful but there are those on our campus who would have us believe that in order to “stop the violence” you must “accept” homosexuality so this can never happen again. Our laws already condemn murder and harassment for all Americans. No one is due special amenities and treatment under the law. I am a Bible-believing, evangelical Catholic Christian who does not take faith lightly and can not disobey my Lord to appease the p.c. sensibilities of the times. And unless Dr. Betsy Linehan (who has a rather cavalier attitude towards Catholic teaching and Biblical principles) has the ability to save your soul (and you are a believer), I suggest you don’t either. I’ve never harassed nor murdered a living soul because I believed they lived in a life of sin. We are to hate the sin but love the sinner. However, this biased case study implies that you are not loving the sinner unless you also love the sin. Dr. Linehan also misrepresents the Archdiocese’s views on homosexuality in “Always Our Children”. She fails to mention that the Cardinal deemed homosexuality as “inherently immoral” and that due to the crisis in the Church future seminarians will be screened.

Another interesting assertion made by the case study is that gay students are “invisible” on campus. Anything sexual does not belong in the public but in the privacy of your own quarters. Going around professing that one is attracted to “this” type of person or “that” type of person is completely inappropriate in a public forum no matter the sexual orientation or “bedroom” idiosyncrasies a person may have. The liberal elite who run college campuses around the country, in addition to SJU, claim to seek “diversity” (a cute p.c. term used as a guise to justify anything they want or don’t want) but they stop short of real open, unbiased dialogue that includes conservatives, practicing Christians and devout Catholics. I’d like to take this moment to call for an open dialogue about the validity of a University-sponsored Alliance and Rainbow Week. This should include the Alliance professors or heads and myself plus those who support my stance, of my choosing. I’m sure the representatives will have no problem in contacting me. Considering the Alliance has been “hammered-in” at SJU but kept hushed to “outsiders” (probably the fear of parents and donating alumni) I figure the probability of this “open-minded” administration allowing a true forum of debate in person will occur sometime in between the Second Coming and hell freezing over.

Another cute p.c. term used to scare others is “discrimination”. No one wants to be called discriminatory. This has been used rather vaguely. Let’s be specific. Gay marriage? This was hypothetically alluded to in the case study. This sets a legal precedence to any “union” that claims the now hallowed arguments of “I was born that way” or “I’m/we’re in love” with no way of disproving so. Whether it be incestual unions or man-boy relationships or man and beast. Don’t laugh. In my experience in political activism you have no idea what every liberal fringe group wants to impose on mainstream America under their noses with the only barrier so far being active Christians. For example, the gay activist group GLSEN has tried to bully the public school system into allowing them to expose kinder-gardeners to “cross-dressing” and questioning their sexuality to better “educate” them on “diversity” so that they are less prone to “discriminate” when they are older. See how spiffy, cute p.c. terms come in handy? The only barrier to this evil as well were Christians.

I encourage students, from whatever viewpoints, to express their opinions and beliefs without the fear of being labeled “homophobic” (which is a political term not a medical diagnosis). This tactic of suppressing “un-hip” views is not new. Think immigration should be restricted and that affirmative action is unconstitutional? Then you may be labeled a racist. Our country is paying for that today too, folks. My heart goes out to those Christian students who attended SJU expecting it to be like Steubenville but got the moral character of Berkeley or Smith instead. There are many false prophets and wolves in sheep’s clothing, therefore a collar or several initial behind one’s name doesn’t automatically mean someone is working for Christ. You’ll know a tree by its fruit. In my humble opinion and sincerest prayers I encourage all Hawks to read the Holy Bible for themselves (not Father Ph.D.’s revised interpretations and assessments) and give God’s plan a chance.

Praise Him,Jaydalia Jones