I'm sometimes criticized by fellow gay-rights advocates for
being too accommodating towards our opponents. Why dignify
gay-rights opponents with a response?
The simple answer is that, like it or not, homosexuality is an
issue on which many thoughtful and decent people disagree. Ignoring
this disagreement won't make it go away, so instead I strive for
productive dialogue.
Against that background, I was especially disappointed when
Aquinas College in Grand Rapids revoked my invitation to speak
there on April 3rd, calling me on the morning of the event to
"postpone" it, and then canceling it one week later. In announcing
his decision, Aquinas President C. Edward Balog cited concerns
about a policy gap regarding speakers who are critical of Catholic
teaching. Local Bishop Walter Hurley was apparently among those
encouraging Balog to cancel the event.
In my sixteen years of speaking on gay rights, only once before
have I had an event canceled-in Louisiana, a week following
Hurricane Katrina. I have presented at religious institutions,
including several Catholic colleges. Indeed, I spoke at St. Ambrose
College (Davenport, IA) exactly a week before my scheduled Aquinas
lecture. These have all been positive events.
My visit to Aquinas was contracted months in advance, and
advertising went on for some time prior to the event. Those who
invited me knew my position. I aim to promote respect for gay and
lesbian persons by critically examining common arguments against
same-sex affection. I am not (any longer) a Catholic, and I oppose
key aspects of the Church's teaching. I believe that the case
against homosexuality is unsound. That said, I have no interest in
distorting Catholic teaching. On the contrary, the more clearly a
position is set out, the more rigorously we can discuss it.
So when the organizers asked me how I would feel about having an
official Catholic response to my talk, I welcomed the suggestion
enthusiastically. This is not because I believe that every campus
event needs to present "both sides." For one thing, the idea of
"both sides" misleadingly suggests that there are two and only two
sides to any issue, equally balanced along a clear and
non-arbitrary middle ground. In reality, social issues admit of
countless possible positions-some reasonable, some less so, and
some beyond the pale. It would be both practically impossible and
pedagogically undesirable for every event to include every possible
perspective. As one critic of my invitation put it, "What's next?
Should we invite the KKK to present their views, too?"
Of course we shouldn't. But the KKK analogy fails, and the
reason for its failure is instructive. The reason is the same point
I make to my critics in the choir: unlike segregation,
homosexuality is an issue on which many thoughtful and decent
people still disagree. Ignoring this disagreement won't make it go
away, so instead let's strive for productive dialogue.
In short, I welcomed the inclusion of a Catholic response
because it was entirely consistent with my aims as an educator. It
would manifest Aquinas's identity not just as a CATHOLIC College,
but as a Catholic COLLEGE-a place where serious discussion of
controversial issues could take place. It was a win-win-win
proposal: good for me, good for the administration, and (most
important) good for the Aquinas students, who presumably attend
college in part to learn about diverse perspectives and how to
evaluate them. Shutting down the event robbed us all of a valuable
teaching moment.
After the cancellation, President Balog was quoted in the Grand
Rapids Press as stating, "We want to explore the issue from an
academic perspective, not from the perspective of an antagonistic
attack to core Catholic values."
This is a gross mischaracterization of my approach, as anyone
with even a passing knowledge of my scholarly research or my public
advocacy would recognize. It pains me to see such distortion coming
from a Catholic college president.
It pains me as an academic, but it also pains me as a former
Catholic. I sometimes joke that I'm not a fallen Catholic, because
I didn't fall-I leapt. But the truth is that I still have deep
affection and respect for the Catholic faith. Affection, because of
relationships with countless priests, nuns, and lay theologians who
nurtured me in lasting ways. Respect, because of the Church's
intellectual and moral tradition, which takes "big questions"
seriously and strives to integrate faith and reason.
That affection and respect are sorely tested today.
