For publication in response to editorial “MU [linebacker] makes national headlines by “coming out” – February 12, 2014 issue of The Vandalia Leader.
Goodness, Mr. Schott, your column titled “Schott in the Dark” is very appropriate. You are definitely in the Dark Ages. Your response about University of Missouri linebacker Michael Sam’s announcement that he is homosexual is quite hypocritical but typical of people with your mentality.
First off, you say “he’s informing the entire world what he prefers to take place behind closed doors.” You continue by saying, “Frankly, I don’t want to know.”
I don’t recall Sam telling the public about his sexual proclivities. I don’t recall reading about what he likes to do behind closed doors with other men. That is all your concoction and the concoction of people who think like you, not Sam’s.
This entire country surrounds itself with heterosexual messages. You cannot turn on a television program without being bombarded with heterosexual images. How many television and movie scenes show heterosexual acts? How many sexual activities of celebrities make the news (e.g. Charlie Sheen, Tiger Woods, Woody Allen, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim and Tammy Baker, Bill Clinton, etc.)? Heterosexuals proclaim their “behind doors” sexuality in almost every part of society. Using your mentality, why should gays have to know what goes on behind closed doors of heterosexual populations?
The second issue with your article is when you refer to what you’d feel if changing clothes in the locker room with an openly gay man. Any inhibition about your own body and endowment is your problem, not the gay guy who may be next to you. Do you think the gay guy is purposely going to “invade your space” so you have to get dressed quickly? You apparently come from a backward belief system that promotes the idea that ALL gay people are constantly trying to “convert” others to homosexuality. That’s just a result of your upbringing. Maybe you are not acquainted with many openly gay men.
The third issue is your fundamental ideals about sexuality. Many understandings of biblical scriptures are what someone has been told to believe. You have been conditioned throughout your life to believe someone’s interpretation of scripture. Many of these interpretations are folklore of sorts, misinterpretations that evolved over the years until they became institutionalized in the population of believers. Not all dogma is accurate. If you actually take the time to research the history of your religious constructions about sexuality, you’d realize that many biblical passages meant something totally different 2,000 years ago.
Modern readers often inaccurately apply biblical passages to negate sexuality. (There is a vast, documented history about Christianity’s malevolent behaviors and beliefs surrounding sexuality – very evil stuff.) These interpretations of hate speech (usually subtle) are common in religion, and the argument that “the Bible says so” is a lazy way of avoiding having to actually question and validate one’s beliefs. A more accurate response is “it’s what I’ve been told the Bible says.”
Another example of your hypocrisy is when you wrote, “Though I may feel one way about the issue, it shouldn’t and doesn’t effect my love for someone who is homosexual.” What a typical response from those with your mentality? Hate in the guise of love speech.
Before readers jump to the conclusion that I’m bashing the Holy Bible and all Christians, I am NOT. I am simply pointing out the hatred some Christians profess as if endorsed by God.
Mr. Schott, it is time for you to “come out.” Come out from underneath your rock of ages to learn to love, understand, and have compassion for every creature of God. Isn’t that what Christ taught? Or is that only something I was told to believe?
As a sidebar, if you are against the media circus associated with Sam’s disclosure, then why did you jump on the circus wagon by writing an editorial about it? Much hypocrisy.