Thanks, now we all look dumb.

What, I ask, is to stop this from happening at Biola?

Basically what has happened is that a certain Grant Turck wanted to start a “Students against Homophobia” club at Pepperdine and was kept from doing so by their administration. He said he thought they would be receptive because of their ‘diversity statement’ and now wants to start putting the pressure on them to give in.

Now I think Pepperdine handled this situation quite poorly; they warned him not to tell anyone about their decision and refused to discuss it at all. This is within their rights, but it opens up the floodgates for criticism that Pepperdine actually is in favour of hating gays. It’s a subtle distinction between hating the sinner and hating the sin, so it’s an area in which a great deal more caution than Pepperdine used would be needed. The average reader is not going to pick up on that distinction.

This could create an avalanche of backlash. The response predicted on California Republic is something like:

We must weep for the downtrodden Grant Turck. We must force Pepperdine to shed itself of its medieval, so-called religion. The Clinton wing of the GOP must stand together and take up this student’s cause. It is another step for Americanism and the Constitution to dispense with the hobbling chains of traditionalism and the phony-baloney ‘natural law.’ ...Why can’t we be more like the French?

I guess we are only supposed to pay attention to the parts of the Constitution that are useful…. Thankfully most of the reaction I’ve read so far is more along the lines of ‘It’s their own university, let them set their own policies.’ We haven’t degraded that far into madness yet, as I first thought when I read the California Republic quotation seriously. Still, it hurts the credibility of Christians when we see prominent institutions set up to look like they are defending hate.