Of course! Fun times. Fun times.

For what it is worth, I have a "friend" who is *well connected* within their organization. According to my "friend", quite a few (maybe most?) IFC/NIC/NPC/NPHC HQs are monitoring this site. Which is not breaking news by any means to many of us. In any case, as it was explained to me, their HQ has a few volunteers join GC to follow various discussions. And not only the discussions within their specific GLO forum, but general threads as well. (When one joins GC, one may sign up for notices etc.) According to my "friend", most do not post while they are monitoring. However, others elect to join in the discussions.

Yes, these sites are monitored.

It's really dumb for someone from a nhq to join in a discussion about the Bible and homosexuality, though, if it's going to be under a "cloud of mystery." I hope that particular username is anything but a nhq person.

I should have been more clear. I was simply addressing one reason as to why a first post might come years after the poster has joined GC.

only because swtxbelle always has something mean to say about how im a troll or dity or something:mad:

:(oh sorry i thought i was getting my head bitten off again i didnt know you were talking about GreekChatObserv

I know for a fact that there are at least 2 members of International Council who regularly post in the AGD forum. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more that we don't know about. Dozens of VST members are here as well.

I remember we couldn't even make any mention of GreekChat at the 2004 Convention if an IC member was within earshot.

I know of certain fraternities, which convey strong christian principles. The members consider homosexuality as something immoral, and there is an immorality clause in their rulebook, which states that they can expel a member if they conduct in an immoral manner. One of the members stated that if they know of a member, who is engaging in homosexual acts, then they can begin proceedings to expel such member. Never mind that many members are straight but engaging in adulterous affairs, which would constitute an immoral act. So it seems there are double standards.

:eek:Or engaging in sex before marriage.:rolleyes: Are these NIC fraternities like Sigma Chi and ATO, with a strong Christian background (but do not require their members be Christian) or other fraternities that are more Christian focused to the point where no non-Christians would join?

Agh! *whispers* Big Brother's watching!

http://media.bigoo.ws/content/gif/smiles/smiles_34.gif

There certainly is a double standard in some fraternities. But condoning some immorality doesn't mean it is a good idea to condone or bring in other immoral activity.

They're simply drawing the line somewhere. A lot of us will be friends with people who occasionally lie, or are cruel, etc. But most of us may not be friends with a thief or a rapist, etc. Is it hypocritical? Maybe. Certainly a double standard for a lot of Christians.

The answer is addressing your own problems, not in condoning other immoral behavior.

If fraternities were protesting and going on tv to talk about how all gay people are going to hell, then I'd agree with you. But I don't really see any public condemnation.

I had to just about stop reading this at the very first line.
Double standards at some Fraternities???
Off the top of my head I can recall: Rape, drug use, destruction of public property,theft, riot, under age drinking, and hazing. And the line is drawn at a person being gay?
Perhaps I need to read the whole posting when I have the time too.

people are hypocrites.

Regardless of where the line is drawn at the individual level, it is wonderful that the law recognizes the difference between illegal behaviors (underage drinking, rape, etc.) and perceived deviant and immoral behaviors (homosexuality, sex before marriage, promiscuity, etc.).

That's all.

What a cop-out.

But some of what you just posted cross over each other.

i overlook some things and not others.

No.

Uh huh...which is great for YOU ;)

But not great if you're trying to make everyone else piss everytime you drink water.

I'll give you underage drinking, but surely you are not suggesting that rape, drug use, destruction of public property, theft and riot (or hazing, for that matter) happen in every chapter? (I have feeling that by "some fraternities," shinerbock meant "some chapters of some fraternities.") Because unless you are, the "some fraternities" fits.

Jon, I don't get what you're saying.

Because fraternities based on Christian tenets sometimes condone or ignore sinful behavior, they should openly welcome other sinful behavior? Maybe that is rational response in some universe, just not in mine.

What does rape have anything to do with it? I've certainly never been a part of any group that condones rape, or anything remotely close to rape. I hope you haven't either.

shut up.

I think the issue is the hypocrisy. If you won't condone sinful behavior, fine, but don't only play the morality card on homosexuality. If you have a morality standard than hold to it. If you only use said standard to keep out the people you don't like then you're a hypocrite.

(Plural You)

i guess i'm not a hypocrite because i think homosexuality is disgusting and that's the reason i wouldn't vote a gay dude in.

LOL

I think it can be borderline hypocritical. But of course we're not talking about going out and condemning all gays to hell, and then living an immoral personal life. We're talking about not partaking in or accepting one sin just because you fall victim to another. Acknowledging that something else is a sin, as a sinner, doesn't make you a hypocrite in my mind. But, maybe everyone else's definition is different. Is it hypocritical to personally object to drugs simply because you drink?

I think many fraternities have double standards, but whether they engage in hypocrisy, I'm not sure. I don't really think it matters that much, I'm sure I'm hypocritical at times, but that is still no reason to condone something I find morally wrong.

Now, if your entire decision is based on homosexuality, the sin, then yeah you're likely taking a hypocritical stance if you ignore the faults of other people. But like I said, I think this is a non-issue. If your choices are to be hypocritical or condone a sin, does it really matter which choice you make? There is an answer, as I noted earlier, but it certainly isn't to forgo hypocrisy while embracing some other morally repugnant activity.

:( "That was hurtful." :(

~ Kate Hudson How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days

shut up

Sex before marriage and promiscuity and rape (in full definition), to me, can be connected on the same tree.
Laws just codify social actions.

Read RM threads and tell me.
Not every chapter, not every GLO, not every campus.
But in some combination of the above, yes.

I do not condone rape at all. Yet I know it happens. I live every day knowing of at least one date rape that happened in my chapter while I was there.
And I am sure that "no" was taken as a "yes" more than once.
I am sure that your Saturday and Sunday mornings have been very much like reading Penthouse Letters a few times.
And the same can be said for the other issues I bought up and a list of more.

We as groups judge each other and others all the time.
During rush, during pledging and during Brother/Sisterhood.
You want to be part of a group that, for the most part, you fit in with well.
So, as pointed out by a few others here, is in not rather hypocritical to to turn your back on a person who may share everything but sexual preference and yet embrace a person who breaks laws or social contracts?

jon1856.....

Jon, in your scenario, it probably is hypocritical. Double standard for sure.

But we're also not in reality with this hypo, and I don't think it would matter anyway. If you find a republican gay guy who likes to hunt, fish, play golf and drink, I'd like to see it. I'm sure there is someone out there like that, but chances are they're in the small minority, and they'll likely never have the desire to rush.

That said, you still have the problems I mentioned earlier. Who does he bring to formal? Is that guy gonna bring his bf around the house? That would be very uncomfortable for everyone. Are people gonna bite their tongue when talking about how they think homosexuality is wrong or immoral? Doesn't that take away some of the purpose of a fraternity of like minded individuals?

^^^^Dennis Hastert, Mark Foley....

I know people like this. There were tons of Republican gay dudes at W&L and even some who were "fratty." Some of them only came out of the closet after graduation. Not that me knowing people like this proves anything to you.

You probably know people like this too, but just don't realize they're gay.

Certainly it happens -- more often than anyone would like to admit, probably (as to some of your examples) -- but I think you're over-reaching stating it the way you did and for the argument you did.

Regarding hypocrisy: Of course Shiner is a hypocrite. I am a hypocrite, as well. All Christians are hypocrites. It's the nature of Christianity. We acknowledge our faults, and acknowledge that there are rights and wrongs (while we may all disagree on what those are). Therefore, we do things CONSTANTLY that we know are wrong, and we will still tell you that those things are wrong, and that other things are wrong as well. If we don't, then we can't try to do better.

i love it when you talk strong to me

You're right. I mean, I have no reason to believe you're not being truthful, but anecdotal evidence doesn't mean overly much. I know/have known a lot of gay folks, and none of them really fit that bill. My experience has just been different. But regardless, I still think that the people we're describing are a very small percentage. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

About the last part, who knows. I think it is sometimes a cop out when people say this, as I don't think lines are drawn that clearly. Maybe somebody I would never have thought will turn up gay, but I think it is just as likely that this won't happen. But many will respond that "oh, well they are gay, they just never come out." Perhaps so, but these are certainly convenient ways to never admit being wrong in such arguments.

But even if people were gay in my fraternity, for example, that doesn't really aid the argument that they should be included in membership. So they're like us in a lot of ways, except for a rather major one (sexual orientation). Obviously they don't feel comfortable coming out in that environment, but this has been discussed extensively above.

DST, I certainly engage in hypocritical behavior, but perhaps we're not quite as bad as you make out.

When I think of hypocrite, I think of someone condemning others, alleging they live a nearly-faultless life, while ignoring their own mass of sin. Perhaps my definition is too narrow, but I think there are a lot of us that openly acknowledge our faults, and publicly note that while we think A, B and C are wrong, we know they're not any worse than D, E and F that we engage in. Being a fallible person certainly doesn't mean you can't acknowledge other moral inadequacies.

But it doesn't matter, I'm not really worried about being labeled a hypocrite. As long as people know that when I assert that certain acts are immoral, it doesn't mean I'm proclaiming to be morally superior. I certainly fail on a regular basis to live the type of life I should, so I'm not overly worried about the semantics.

?

Mark Foley = gay Republican congressman from Florida who was (barely) closeted. Lived with a partner and was unmarried, just didn't discuss or publicizie his sexual orientation. Was molested as a child and sent inappropriate emails and IMs to male high school pages. Was outed, resigned his seat in Congress, and entered rehab for alcohol abuse.

Dennis Hastert = former Republican speaker of the house. Criticized for his handling of the Foley scandal (supposedly saw the inappropriate emails/IMs and didn't do anything about it until they were leaked to the press). Led to his eventual resignation. There is a lot of speculation regarding whether or not he is gay. I didn't know that myself until alum posted it. I tried to find some unbiased websites that discuss it but couldn't. He is married with adult children but lives in Washington with his unmarried male chief of staff (or at least he did before he resigned). Evidently when his wife comes to visit she stays in a hotel. I have no idea if these are accurate b/c they're mostly from liberal blogs, but here are the links I found:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawren...r_b_31171.html
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2006/10/flaggots.html
http://boyculture.typepad.com/boy_cu...stert_gay.html

I think we basically agree :) The idea that you have to be perfect to have a moral problem with anything is ridiculous. And so, if that makes us all hypocrites, that's fine. All Christians, of all flavors, are hypocrites.