EFordwrite

Thursday, March 23, 2006

Letter for group editing:
Kat,

You did a great job of tugging on the reader’s heart. I was deeply touched by the paper on the whole. After I read it, I wanted to reach out to the youth of America who have to deal with their sexual orientation during the most awkward time of their life. Initially, the first sentence just makes you read on, you want to know why, who, and possibly what the reaction was from his sister, which you may want to include. After having read the third page, I just wished that someone could have helped him, I was deeply saddened. I loved the piece on a whole; I thought it was very thoughtful, deep, and detailed. I wouldn’t say that anything was confusing, but I would suggest using more colorful language, that would pull on the readers heart strings even more.
I felt as though the message of the narrative was to describe what life is like for a young person discovering their sexuality, focusing on a boy of the Catholic faith. You certainly do a great job of highlighting his struggles, the situation on a whole, and his fears. He fears that his peers will find out and that his struggle to hide his homosexuality will fail and his life will be over. He feels like all has failed anyway, because even his faith won’t accept him. He feels like that is the place, of all places, he should feel welcome and accepted. The issue probably emerges in the second paragraph, “Robbie was always considered to be an outsider among his peers at the all boy Catholic school”. I found that you clearly unveil the issue thoroughly throughout the paper, because as the reader reads on they find the issue in detail. This narrative illuminates the human condition in the fact that this is not an uncommon struggle among teens, it really does happen. Through this narrative the reader can see someone’s true struggle and story as well as the story of his family.
I think that may want to improve on the imagery, make it more vivid, and be more descriptive. Using more colorful words would help do this. On the whole, I think the paper may benefit from more detail throughout; you may just have to improvise. I found the detail in the first paragraph particularly appealing.
This narrative is definitely biographical. You are telling someone else’s story and it is a teenage male’s story. I believe the climax of your paper may rest in the boy’s visits to the counselor. The reader can find suspense in the first paragraph when you are describing his sister finding his body. I would pinpoint one of the main conflicts at the end when the school would not permit his mother to come speak to the student body and the other just being his struggle with accepting his own sexuality.
You do a great job of developing Robbie’s character, though you may want to create some ethos. You want the reader to know that they can trust your knowledge of this story, though you do seem pretty familiar with Robbie and his situation as well as the topic. You may want to ask Dr. Malesh how you could do this more effectively.
You may want to make the element of time more clear, how much time goes by in when telling this story, it sounds like it may be a couple of years. Is it? The event that the narrative is centered around is tangible and the elements of the story interact very well. I would recommend using your quotes more effectively, perhaps refer to the sheet Dr. Malesh gave to us in class; it would make the narrative flow more effectively.

Great job overall, I really enjoyed reading it! ~ Emily

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

the rest of the review on "Of Mice and Men"

The structure of the play is very effective when serving the theme of the performance. It shows the audience that over a few days George and Lennie’s dream is shattered. This also shows the audience that it’s very easy of dreams to end and it can be tomorrow, it’s simple. I have always found the title of the play very interesting; it is very different and really makes one think. I believe that since Lennie is really the main character of the play and it is basically written based on his actions, it means that that Lennie is “Of Mice and Men”. Mice and men surround his life; the men take care of him as he finds happiness and peace with petting mice. I really enjoyed the play, however my initial feeling was that there could have been better casting, but now that I think about it almost a week later I think they did a great job.
I believe that the production clearly revealed the meaning of the play. Though the meaning was not crystal clear, one needed to step back and think about the morals of the play to understand the true meaning of it. The acting was really casual and easy to understand, it was not overdone which I truly dislike in theatre. The cast was sensational; I really enjoyed the vibrancy of the actress who played Curley’s wife. Jefferson Breland, who played Lennie, did a fabulous job with the mannerisms of a person who is challenged by a severe mental disability. He truly made Lennie’s character come to life.
The production could not have been directed any better, everything flowed without a hitch, including the lighting, props, and costumes. Moreover, the scenery was very appropriate for each scene; it was never too many props in each scene. I felt as though the set was very versatile; it was a circle and was able to rotate by motor if the set needed to be changed. The set was easily changed from a boarding house to a barn to the wilderness. I was very impressed by the lighting; it proved to be very effective. The audience was able to determine what time of the day it was and if the setting was inside or outside. I believe that there is a great need for improvement with the sound. Though the theatre is fairly small, it was often times difficult for the audience to hear exactly what George and Lennie were saying. There was nothing special about the characters costumes, the men were dressed in blue jeans with flannel button up shirts with hats. Curley’s wife was always wearing a simple floral sundress.
Although I am an amateur, critiquing professional theatre I thought the production was fantastic. The plot and production were completely solid and very easy to follow. The biggest success of the production was the casting for George and Lennie, they truly carried the play, just as Steinbeck had imagined. I also felt that the casting for Curley’s wife was a great success. Other strengths of the play were definitely seen in the scenery and props, though the casting was what made the play such a huge success.
I was definitely moved by this production, perhaps because I work with Special Ed children who are like Lennie. For the majority of the production I was thinking to myself, I hope that the kids I work with will have a friend like George to help them along the way. However, at the end of the play my thoughts changed, I don’t know if I would want to them to have a friend that would treat them like George treated Lennie, and took his life. I had never read the book or seen the play before so I was especially surprised when George shot Lennie. It was heartbreaking to see him fool Lennie to look away so that he wouldn’t see him pull the trigger, it made me sick to my stomach. The play did make me think about the reality of achieving the American Dream, there will always be obstacles to overcome and the importance of helping those who are less fortunate than you. I definitely found myself caught up in the action and characters. Furthermore, I felt disappointed with the ending of the production, probably because I was rooting for the underdog, Lennie. I found the production to be very original and exciting, which kept me on the edge of my seat the whole time.

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

draft 1 from my review of "Of Mice and Men" for theatre:


The fictional tragedy Of Mice and Men written by John Steinbeck debuted on February 28, 2006 at the historic Wells Theatre in Norfolk, Virginia. The renowned Virginia Stage Company presented the production, directed by Chris Hanna. I attended a matinee performance on Sunday, March 12. The plot followed traveling farmhands through an agricultural valley in North California during 1937.
The story begins in Act 1 as the two main characters George and Lennie, stay the night along the sandy banks of the Salinas River on a Thursday night. George cares for Lennie and insures that he is fed dinner though Lennie would be much happier with ketchup on his beans. Lennie wants George to remind him of what life will be like one day, how they will live on a lot of land and have a farm of their own and most importantly, Lennie will be able to have lots of rabbits. George also reminds him that they will be traveling to a new farm the next morning to find new work since they got fired from their previous job. The audience is introduced to Lennie’s fascination with feeling/ petting soft things, in this scene he finds mice to pet, which George finds disgusting and discards. It is noticed that Lennie is very different than the normal grown man, which is later implied again when George admits that his has made the promise to watch after Lennie for the rest of his life. George advises Lennie should anything bad happen come back to this camp that they have set up and hide out, he will come find him when he can, and not to talk, he will do all the talking for the both of them. The next morning they set out for their new place of employment on the ranch. However, the duo shows up around midday, too late to go out to work. Candy the handyman around the bunkhouse they will be staying at shows them around the place a little and later introduces them to the boss. Later Friday night they meet all the workers on the ranch who will also be living with them in the bunkhouse. They also meet the boss’s son, Curley, who is a hot shot, and his new wife, who many believe is rather risqué.
In the second Act George confides in Silm why they were fired from their pervious job and gets him to give Lennie one of his dog’s puppies. Candy, the handyman, overhears of George and Lennie’s plans of purchasing land and getting the hell out of dodge, he wants in on it. George agrees that he can be a part since he has a lot of money saved. As Curley has picked on Lennie in the past in the act he is does it again and in return he crushes Curley’s hand. On Sunday afternoon, Lennie plays with the puppies in the barn and runs into Curley’s wife, who is trying to skip town to get away from her husband. She notices he has killed the puppy that he is petting, but he continues to pet it because it is soft. He shares with her his secret of liking to touch soft things, she offers her hair to him, however because he does not know how to be gentle he makes her scream then tries to quite her. He is too rough with her and kills her by breaking her neck. The men of the ranch find Curley’s wife dead and go out on a search for Lennie. George knows exactly what has happened and goes to the sandy beach and is forced to kill Lennie before he is found.
The main theme that runs through this production is the American Dream during the 1930’s era of Depression. However this can be related somewhat to the American Dream today. Lennie got in the way of George achieving what he wanted out of the American Dream, the large amount of land, the farm, and the whole lifestyle that went along with it. However the saddening aspect that ruined the American Dream of Lennie was his own mental illness, which was ultimately what, ruined the dream of George. Furthermore the American Dream is shown again when Curley’s wife confesses to Lennie that her new life on the ranch is not what she thought it would be. She would rather go follow her dream of becoming a star. I believe that Steinbeck is attempting to tell readers that the ideal American Dream is impossible, there will always be roadblocks or bumps in the road. The chances for finding the ultimate American Dream is slim to none. I believe that this theme is rather easily identified when one really looks back at the play; Steinbeck did a superb job when attempting to express this theme to his audiences.

Monday, March 20, 2006

Prewriting Assignment for Narrative Essay:

Intro: John is about ready to face his Sunday congregation knowing that the issue of homosexuality is splitting his church in two, he prays to God for help before he presents his sermon on this issue.

Presenting the history of the issue (past 40 years)
Presbyterian’s tradition, we believe that the Bible is the word of God but in a secondary sense.
Many discrepancies in Bible stories (provide examples: first farmer, how many animals on the ark, Easter Sunday)
There are Biblical texts that have nothing to do with homosexuality; however they do deal with righteousness, justice, and compassion.
Creation Story in Genesis: Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. Here it is clearly outlined that heterosexuality is good, but does it follow automatically that homosexuality is evil? Drawing such firm conclusions from silence is risky at best; many are just imposed by the reader.
Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13: Both verses are part of the Holiness Code, which was designed to keep Israel pure. As is seen in these verses, homosexual intercourse is punishable by death, however so are many other practices which Christian’s choose to ignore. It raises a question within the church; even those most fervently opposed to homosexuality do not say homosexuals should be executed. Within the same Code those who are divorced and remarried face the same punishment and children who curse their own parents are said to face death as well. Would this be the will of the God who died for our sins? Though the Code claims that homosexuality is seen as an abomination, the Bible refers to many others which we no longer include. For example, eating rabbits and pigs (11:6), shellfish like shrimp and lobster (11:9), sowing two kinds of seeds in a field or wearing a garment made of two kinds of fabrics (19:9), having sex with a woman during her period (20:18). How is it that we can discard abominations such as selfish and pork while we take abominations such as homosexuality so literally? The issue is not do we set aside certain scriptures as no longer applicable; the issue is when do we do it and what principles and standards of interpretation do we employ? We must determine to what extent we are bound to the restrictions of the Holiness Code.
Why do we express such moral outrage against homosexuals within the church, while we seem to remain tolerant about other forms of sin? For example, extramarital sex, greed, pride, gluttony, drunkenness, etc. Peter Gomes in his book The Good Book, says “the biblical writers never contemplated a form of homosexuality in which loving, monogamous and faithful persons sought to live out the implications of the gospel. All they knew of homosexuality was prostitution, pederasty, lasciviousness, and exploitation”.
Conclusion to the sermon: Many Christians see homosexuals as modern day lepers, especially those homosexuals suffering from AIDS. We as Christians must remember Jesus’ own compassion he had for the lepers and try to apply that to our own issues with homosexuality. Jesus commanded for Christians to “love one another as I have loved you”. In William Barclay’s book The Ten Commandments for Today, “In cases in which no cure is possible, homosexuals who associate for the only human relationship they know must be regarded with sympathy and understanding, in the awareness that hose of us who have never known this problem must be hesitant to condemn something which is outside our experience and which we cannot understand” (164). If we as Christians in the church do not choose to be a part of the solution, we then become a part of the problem. Since we are disciples of God, we have a higher calling, we have been called to love our neighbor as ourselves, and we have been called to be the instruments of God’s heading grace and peace.

Continue with personal stories of Pastor John’s experiences:

Homosexuals coming to him

Members of the congregation coming to him

Sunday, March 19, 2006

Style lesson 5:

In this chapter of William’s Style lesson five, he reviews the importance of cohesion and coherence when writing sentences. He then clearly defines both elements of writing and includes examples of each. While cohesion reflects more on the quality of sentence structure, connecting two sentences or two ideas, coherence refers more to the flow that sentences should provide. With the two elements combined it should leave the reader with a clear message of the writers work. Moreover both are essential to the importance of clarity while writing. He also looks closely at the importance of identifying what idea a sentence truly holds in a sentence. It is warned to not bore the reader with repetitive phrases and words, it impairs on the final result of the work, it prohibits the work from the ultimate flow.

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Why I would like to be a high school basketball coach and how I would create my team:
Building a team is perhaps the biggest challenge a coach faces. From choosing a quick and smart point guard to a large and aggressive center, every position is key to the success of the team. It is essential to look at a player’s ability, skill, and personal qualities to develop the successful team.
As a High School Basketball coach I would carefully consider all these aspects when choosing all my players, but most importantly the first three. I would first choose a Point Guard. I believe that a smart, quick thinking Point Guard contributes a great deal to the success of a team. They are able to run the ball up and down the court, while orchestrating the offense. I would look for qualities such as, strong leadership, great ball handling skills, speed, as well as the ability to share a vision with their teammates not matter if they had possession of the ball or not. After choosing the Point Guard to be first on my team, I would expect them to use their talents and leadership to make their fellow teammates better players.
When carefully considering which position I would fill with my second pick, I chose a Power Forward. I strongly believe that not only should you have someone who is offensive minded in the top two, it is important to complete the pair with a player who is a skilled defender. In this position I expect for my Power Forward’s to be smart ball players, who are quick on their toes and always has a well thought out play. Some aspects that would I feel are essential to my second player on the team include the ability to rebound, run, score, and move not only around the basket, but around any defenders. Much like a Point Guard I would expect them to be able to contribute to the team by running the floor as well as passing. It is important that they push the ball.
When choosing my third player I would come back to ball handling and choose a very skilled Center. I feel as though a skilled Center should be in my top three because the more skilled this player is the more, I as a coach can do. It is essential that this Center along with the others have impressive rebounds. I would also look for qualities such as shot blocking skills, great ball handling, great footwork, and make sure that they were physical and aggressive.
I would expect that all my players be aggressive. I would choose the fourth to be a Small Forward, being someone who has guard skills as well and has the ability to create options for the team while practicing good ball handling skills. My fifth player would be a Shooting Guard, an all around complete player. I would expect them to have great shooting skills, create opportunities, and be able to move without the ball. The sixth player on my team would be another Point Guard, this time concentrating on someone who is a great passer. The seventh would be a Power Forward because they can be multi functional. The eight player would be a Small Forward, followed by the ninth being a Shooting Guard. I would then add the tenth as a Center, the eleventh as a Shooting Guard, and the twelfth as a Small Forward.
I finally conclude my team with my thirteenth player as another Point Guard. I would hopefully be able to use this player interchangeably between a Point Guard and a Shooting Guard. My fourteenth player would be a Power Forward with the hope that I could use them as a Center if need be and that they would be able to rebound and shoot accurately. Finally my fifteenth player would be a Small Forward. I believe that this is the most versatile player; I would hopefully be able to use them as a Shooting Guard, Guard, and Power Forward if necessary.
There are certain qualities and skills I would look for in individual players however there are many I would expect from all of the. I expect that all my players would exemplify such traits including, leadership, confidence in themselves and the team, dedication, motivation, and communication. Though choosing a team can be very challenging, I believe that with all this in mind when choosing my future team it would be very successful.

Friday, March 17, 2006

Theatre Journal 12
Response to Chapter 6

Whether or not you have ever noticed in while being in the audience or reading a play, a playwright has tools. A playwrights tool consist of, actions, dialogue, stage directions, and characters. To begin, dialogue describes what the characters are supposed to say while on stage. In some cases it’s the conversations between the characters on stage. Dialogue is very important because it is what the audience members hear from the stage.
Stage directions are also very significant tools which playwrights use all the time. By using stage directions the playwright is able to get the actors to physical express what he or she is trying to say; sometimes actions speak louder than words. The stage directions that are given are always very “explicit”. These directions are never heard by those in the audience. The stage directions are usually given to the actors when they are given their scripts and practiced while they are in rehearsal. It is important that the audience see what the playwrights are trying to express as well as hear it.
Theatre would be nothing without characters. Tom Markus believes that “characters give body and coherence to the dialogue and the descriptions” of a play (95). Character create each other and they expose what the playwright feels is most important about each character on stage. Essentially characters define each other. Furthermore, another tool that playwrights use is action. They use action both physically and intellectually. Action is used to alter the status quo throughout a play.

Thursday, March 16, 2006

Theatre Journal 11
Response to Chapter 6

I found it very interesting to learn about the plot structure which playwrights base their works on. The three most common structures include: Linear, Cinematic, and Contextual. The most common of these three is a linear structure, in which the plot is organized in a chronological manner. An example of a linear structured play is Oedipus the King, where the plot is arranged referencing time. There are two types of liner plots, continuous linear plots and episodic linear plots, both differ greatly from one another. However there is another variation to linear plots, they can also be simple and complex. A simple plot just tells one story, where a complex plot tells multiple stories. What I found very confusing about the linear plot structure is that there is no specific way to tell the different types of linear structure.
Cinematic plots on the other hand have no chronological order within them. The story is not told along with the series of events. Tom Markus believes that when playwrights use cinematic plot it “allow [them] to include scenes on more than one level of reality” (89). He cites Death of a Salesman as an example. This particular plot allows the plot itself to be “on more than one level of reality” (89). In Death of a Salesman Arthur Miller creates a plot that not only moves in time, but it also moves in the memories of the characters themselves.
Contextual structured plots are very uncommon; however some find this type of plot to be the most entertaining. All the scenes in this plot can stand alone; there are usually a large number of scenes throughout these works. A scene is never lead into the next by the previous scene, hence why they can stand alone. It’s unlike any traditional kind of plot for there is no end, middle, and beginning, which can make it very confusing for an audience who enjoy a clearly defined and structured plot.

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Theatre Journal 10
Reaction from my Professional Play

Today I went to see the Virginia Stage Company’s production of “Of Mice and Men” at the historic Wells Theatre in Norfolk. I had never seen a production of John Steinbeck’s story before, nor had I read the story. Of course I found the plot to be a bit on the disturbing side, as many do, but it was well written and easy to follow.
As George was forced to kill Lenny every heart in the audience broke. It was not Lenny’s fault for what he did; it was nothing that he could control. I believe that George’s character is quite admirable for taking Lenny under his wing, if it weren’t for George Lenny would have been lynched long before he was killed. I am not sure if Steinbeck was attempting to portray Lenny’s character as someone who was mentally handicap or was he focusing more specific on someone who was autistic? It would be interesting to know because of all the specific mannerisms that Lenny has.
To focus more on the aspects of the production, I was not terribly impressed. The main characters were nothing spectacular, and it was difficult to hear them as well. They certainly needed to raise their voices so that everyone could hear them clearly or there need to be a sufficient sound system in place. I thought that many of the supporting characters were much more talented than the main characters, though the actor who played Lenny was an acception. I was however impressed by the lighting and the set. The set was very versatile; it was a circle and was able to rotate by motor if the set needed to be changed. It went from a boarding house to a barn to the wilderness. The use of lighting was very effective. The audience was able to really tell what time of the day it was and if the setting was inside or outside.

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Reflection of Sources



Through the researching process I have really enjoyed learning more about the controversy of homosexuals in the Presbyterian Church. I feel as though this is the only work I have really paid much attention to over the last month, considering I have completely immersed myself in everything I could get my hands on including further research that is to come. I feared just as every other researcher does that I would find the same information repeated over and over, however I was pleased to find this was never the case. All the source’s texts were original and thoughtful, never repeating one another. However, I do wish that people would be completely honest in their opinions and not feel the need to reserve their feelings and beliefs on this controversy.

I really feel that the interview process helped me understand the thoughts of some of my peers as well as strangers. It was interesting to discover why people felt the way they did, what brought them to beliefs they had. I had to analyze was it their upbringing, their political beliefs, or their denomination, just to name a few. It was also helpful to know their logic behind their beliefs. It is essential to interview a wide variety of people, so that you can hear the opinions behind many walks of life. I plan to continue my interviewing process throughout this semester because I feel that it gives me the ability to have a sounding board, where I can ask them further questions if do not understand their initial answer.

I found Pastor Jerry Kirk’s book, The Homosexual Crisis in the Mainline Church: A Presbyterian Minister Speaks Out, to be a great help. Pastor Kirk shares many of his personal experiences, such as counseling homosexuals through the trials and tribulations they face while dealing with their sexual orientation, both inside and outside of the Church. This source helped reveal the stance that many homosexuals have on this important debate. It is expresses their opinions and concerns on what has happened and what is to come in this fight for equality and acceptance in the Presbyterian Church. It also gives advice to the anti-homosexual and how they can become more accepting and understanding of others sexual orientation.

Letha Scanzoni and Virginia Ramey Mollenkott’s book, Is The Homosexual My Neighbor?, explores those who are affected by homosexuality by giving examples of people’s experiences, family and friends of homosexuals. It also discusses the homosexual Christian, their contributions to the church and society. Most importantly it cites specific examples from homosexuals and what they have to say regarding how they have been treated and what hopes they have for the future. Also provided, is an overview of the debate regarding homosexuality in the Church and why Christians find homosexuality hard to deal with.

Another resourceful article written by, Jennifer Ashbaugh, focused on homosexuals being ordained in the Presbyterian Church. However perhaps it was more helped when she looked at older Presbyterian Churches, where homosexuality is an issue, she said that the average age in a Presbyterian Church is about 60 years old, which definitely reflects my church. Ashbaugh also suggests that the Presbytery is “escaping from its previous morals,” and that is the real issue at hand, not homosexuality. This article helped me form my thesis for the paper.

Monday, March 13, 2006

some more revisions from the paper:

The most traditional parishioners who do not wish to even worship among homosexuals take their arguments from the Bible, where they read that it says homosexuality goes against God. Moreover, pro-homosexuals believe are the old rules which are no longer applicable since Christ died for all of our sins or so the church tells Christians when it wants to. Using the Old Testament as evidence, parishioners say that homosexuality is wrong and should be frowned upon. Scripture from Leviticus 18:22 says, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination”. Furthermore in Leviticus 20:13 it states, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them” (Scanzoni and Mollenkott, 60). Many refer to the chapter of Genesis, which supposedly condemns homosexuality, referencing 19:1-11. The description given in Genesis 19:4, “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:” delivers a clear message with the intent of a homosexual rape. Homosexuals argue that this is not condemning all homosexual practices, it condemns such in “the context of gang rape, idolatry, and lustful promiscuity” (Scanzoni and Mollenkott, 111). Scanzoni and Mollenkott, who have examined homosexuality from religious, sociological, and human sexuality views, provide sophisticated views from homosexuals who have dealt with tribulations regarding their sexual orientation. Among one of their participants is a female homosexual minister, who opposes arguments against sodomy, saying “The scripture makes it clear in Genesis that God’s creation has unlimited variety, and we are part of that variety. God looked at his creation and saw that it was good” (Scanzoni and Mollenkott, 41). The Bible indeed states in Genesis 1:31, “And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good”.

The difficulty with this debate arises due to the fact that there are so many divergent views on this topic. Some traditionalists feel that homosexuals come to the Church to make a statement, citing their discomfort with homosexual couples displaying their affection for each other while in church. On the other hand, homosexuals feel that if the world does not see them labeled by their sexual orientation, but rather by name and face, others would be more accepting of their sexuality. Homosexuals argue that the Church should be the last place where they should be discriminated against. One man who served as an elder in his Presbyterian Church believes that, “If the church is to fully do its job of reconciliation among people and between the human family and God, it must support gay people by helping them accept their sexuality and to express it lovingly. Needless to say, the church cannot do this without full acceptance of gay people themselves as healthy and complete persons”(Scanzoni and Mollenkott, 40).

Homosexuals argue that they want to worship in the Presbyterian denomination for their own reasons. They simply wish to worship in the faith that they were raised worshipping with their families, therefore they want to continue the tradition. Others feel that they are part of the community that surrounds the church and want to worship among their neighbors and friends. Most importantly they want to go to Church for the same reasons heterosexuals do, they want to worship God and repent their sins just as heterosexuals do. They argue that it is the anti-homosexual community that ignores their own sins and focuses on theirs, who are they to judge, when homosexuals do recognize their sins. However other homosexuals argue that their “homosexuality is not sinful- it’s okay. God made [them] this way. Good accepts [their] sexuality and lifestyle as good” (Kirk, 14).

A great deal of homosexuals, have a difficult time dealing with their own sexual orientation, not to mention dealing with the agony of being judged in the public eye. Many fear that they will have to publicly confront their sexuality, that it will be detected running the risk of rejection by their loved ones. When their sexuality comes out it usually means “…coming out of the church,” says a young male homosexual (Kirk, 101). Kirk protests that Christians “must respond to gays in a caring and helpful way- showing concern, compassion, and hope for change” (101).

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Style Lesson 4:

In Style Lesson 4, Williams expresses the focuses on the importance of characters in a story. One must clearly define each character in a text, especially the main characters, for completely define the purpose of the text. Williams proceeds to discuss the importance of including characters throughout ones sentence structure as it allows the reader to follow the work more clearly. Characters surely define the meaning and structure of a piece of writing. Most importantly the writer must decide if the character is ultimately the main focus of the piece.

Another topic Williams focuses on is passive verbs and voice, though they do have their uses, they can be over used. Williams believes that it is most difficult for a writer to distinguish between the two. He further examines grammar when discussing the stringing of nouns, which seems to be a pet peeve of his. Williams strictly prohibits this, citing that it useless to continuously use nouns, one after another.

Saturday, March 11, 2006

a couple revised paragraphs for my expo paper:

The Presbyterian Church, although not alone in their struggle with accepting homosexual congregation members, are rather vocal about this issue they see as a problem. Keith Hartman states, “Homosexuality is the most divisive element facing the Church today” (Hartman, vix). It has openly been an issue since the early 70s, suggesting that the Presbytery is “escaping from its previous morals,” and that is the real issue at hand, not homosexuality, yet it is something else (Ashbaugh, 1). It took the Presbyterian Church over seven decades to ordain women into ministry, realizing the length of time it took to overcome that challenge, society must recognize that homosexuality in the Presbyterian Church has only been an issue since the 70s (Ashbaugh, 2).The Presbyterian denomination has always been known for not interpretating the Bible in such a literal sense; however this has become increasingly more prevalent in recent years (Ashbaugh, 1). “Reinterpreting the Bible to meet the needs of…society,” best describes the way in which the Presbytery applies the words of the Bible to life (Ashbaugh, 2). Homosexuals are among those who practice the more loose interpretation of scripture. There are still those conservative members who wish for policies and traditions to not be change or updated and it is not uncommon for heated debates to arise every couple decades, due to congregational fears that the Church is wandering away from their stated principles (Ashbaugh, 2). It would be interesting to see the relationship between the geography of Presbyterians and their view on the issue, since there has been a sudden influx of Presbyterians in the south. Or is this perhaps related to the current average age of the Presbyterian Church, which Jennifer Ashbaugh reveals “…is around 60” (1). The Presbytery will not allow any Presbyterian Church to open its doors for a ceremony uniting a same sex couple in a civil union or marriage. When interviewed, some heterosexuals feel that by accepting homosexuals into the church, would result in destroying the Presbyterian ministry.

[Enter personal experience recognizing lesbian couple’s anniversary in the Presbyterian Church]

Many scholars believe that Christians struggle with this topic of homosexuality in the Church for three main reasons. Many anti-homosexuals, deal with the difficulty of homosexuality as a result of “social and psychological reasons…religious considerations…and informal reasons” (Scanzoni and Mollenkott, 45). It could be argued that other parishioners have more minor arguments, resulting from insufficient knowledge of homosexuality. While interviewing, I found that socially some feel that it is inappropriate for their children to witness homosexual couples interacting, believing that it provokes interest that they wish for these young eyes to not see. This issue is also discussed in Andrew Sullivan’s Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. Though it could be argued that, our society has long kept homosexuality as a quiet personal matter, and to now make it publicly acceptable is perceived by many as flaunting immoral behavior. Another complaint questions why homosexual couples can’t worship in a more liberal environment; perhaps they would be more comfortable among those who have the same views as they. Some of those whom I interviewed believed that homosexuals have committed an ultimate sin, sodomy and that if homosexual acts are approved of they will “…have lost [their] spiritual home” (Kirk, 13). Perhaps some of the more informal reasons that anti-homosexual parishioners have difficulty with the issue is that they do not understand why homosexuals are rocking their church’s world, and why they wouldn’t wish to worship in a place more accepting of their sexual orientation?

Friday, March 10, 2006

a couple revised paragraphs from my paper:

There are many controversies that exist in the Church; perhaps the most controversial topic being homosexuality. Though homosexuality may not be the most talked about issue, it tends to be the issue behind many underlying problems. For example, this is the issue that tore my Church apart. My parents no longer attend Royster Memorial Presbyterian Church, because of their acceptance of the homosexual community. My parents are not the only members who have stop attending, many more were before them and more preceded them. It is for that reason that the church is currently in great financial stress due to the support they lost from many parishioners who the Church depended on to keep our place of worship afloat. This particular issue appealed to me because it has torn my Presbyterian Church apart. The controversy of homosexuals worshiping among heterosexuals in the Presbyterian Church revolves around each side’s perceptions of morality.

In this particular community many of the members are traditional, conservative people, who wish to worship in that type of environment. The environment which the members refer to is that of a formal place of worship, which could be referred to as “old fashion”. The majority of the congregation wears their Sunday best to church and wish to worship among similar people who share the same morals and values. Though this may sound narrow minded and some in support of homosexuals may protest that homosexuals can indeed share some of the same morals and values of those heterosexuals. Many of the anti-homosexual parishioners feel as though homosexual couples should not be welcome to worship among the members of the church. Homosexuals argue that they should not be discriminated against when all they wish to do is worship the God who they share with their neighbors, and feel as though the church should be a haven where they can be accepted despite their sexual orientation. The controversy continues on with many issues arising contributing to a deeper more passionate debate.

The Presbyterian Church, although not alone in their struggle with accepting homosexual congregation members, are rather vocal about this issue they see as a problem. Keith Hartman states, “Homosexuality is the most divisive element facing the Church today” (Hartman, vix). It has openly been an issue since the early 70s, suggesting that the Presbytery is “escaping from its previous morals,” and that is the real issue at hand, not homosexuality, yet it is something else (Ashbaugh, 1). It took the Presbyterian Church over seven decades to ordain women into ministry, realizing the length of time it took to overcome that challenge, society must recognize that homosexuality in the Presbyterian Church has only been an issue since the 70s (Ashbaugh, 2).The Presbyterian denomination has always been known for not interpretating the Bible in such a literal sense; however this has become increasingly more prevalent in recent years (Ashbaugh, 1). “Reinterpreting the Bible to meet the needs of…society,” best describes the way in which the Presbytery applies the words of the Bible to life (Ashbaugh, 2). Homosexuals are among those who practice the more loose interpretation of scripture. There are still those conservative members who wish for policies and traditions to not be change or updated and it is not uncommon for heated debates to arise every couple decades, due to congregational fears that the Church is wandering away from their stated principles (Ashbaugh, 2). It would be interesting to see the relationship between the geography of Presbyterians and their view on the issue, since there has been a sudden influx of Presbyterians in the south. Or is this perhaps related to the current average age of the Presbyterian Church, which Jennifer Ashbaugh reveals “…is around 60” (1). The Presbytery will not allow any Presbyterian Church to open its doors for a ceremony uniting a same sex couple in a civil union or marriage. When interviewed, some heterosexuals feel that by accepting homosexuals into the church, would result in destroying the Presbyterian ministry.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Reflecting on reading The Taming of the Shrew


I have hated reading The Taming of the Shrew, even though it is my second time reading this Shakespearean play. Reviewing the play in class has really helped me to better understand the meaning and comedy behind Shakespeare’s interpretation of battle of the sexes. I have taken a Shakespeare class in high school and then again here two years ago, and I was unaware of the audience which he was responsible for entertaining. I would imagine that it was quite a task to write such a production that would entertain the lowest and the highest classes of society.
I must say it has really helped a great deal to watch the production of The Taming of the Shrew. I was able to see the humor in it a lot easier and understand it a lot more clearly. I thoroughly enjoyed the actress’s performance of Kate; I thought that she did an excellent job in conveying to the audience how hard she really was to get along with. As a result of her performance I liked her better than the more cherished daughter Bianca. I really enjoyed the actor’s ability to move about as though they were rag dolls and tumblers. It really added to the comedy of the piece to be able to see such movement.


Reflecting on the tour of Cobb Theatre


Today we went on a tour of Cobb Theatre. I really enjoyed seeing how things worked behind the scenes, though I was very surprised that there is such a small amount of space to work. I did find that everyone makes great use of the area that is provided. For example the costume room, my closet is definitely not that organized. I also took note of the tools in the workshop, which hung so neatly from the peg board. Every room with the exception of the costume and sewing room were exceptionally clean. I noticed that someone has put great effort into the organization of the whole system. Organization is the key to the success of every production. I also found the lighting system very interesting, and surprisingly very high tech. Though I have notice, during performances that the lighting was very sophisticated, I never realized what was involved and how complex it was. I hope that by completing my shop hours I will be able to experience all that is involved behind the scenes. I think it will be very rewarding to see all the hours of work pay off when the production of Good debuts.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

An interview for my paper:

Is worshipping among homosexuals an issue in your church? Do you have a personal issue with it?
All are welcome to attend our church and no I do not have an issue worshipping with homosexuals. Jesus ministered to the prostitutes, the tax collectors (cheats) and others. Thus I welcome homosexuals to join in worship and hope that they can find forgiveness for their sins.
Has your place of worship ever dealt with any issues involving homosexuality?
I do not know of any specifically, however, it is our church policy that all are welcome to worship with us.
If so, how was it handled, what was the outcome?
N/A
Is it your belief that homosexuals can be Christians?
Yes, all Christians are sinners – we all sin in different ways.
How do you think God perceives homosexuals?
Just as he does other sinners. However, citing the destruction of Sodom and Gamora (sp?) I do think that homosexuality especially infuriates God.
Do you feel that homosexuality is an unforgivable sin?
No, I think that if a homosexual confesses his/her sins and accepts Jesus Christ as his/her Savior, they are forgiven.
What is your stance on homosexual couples adopting children? Do you feel as though it is infringing upon “the family unit”?
I oppose homosexual couples adopting children. Simply put this is infringing on “the family unit”. Moreover, God created man and woman to complete each other and to form a unity that is as God desired. I do not think the unity between same sex couples is as God intended it and does not offer children the specific strengths that fathers and mothers offer in their specific roles.
Also, to be an blunt about it – if God wanted same sex couples to have children, then he would have given men the ability to be fertilized by other men and similarly with women.
Do you feel that the issue of homosexuality results from how people perceive morality? How people deal with/handle the issue of homosexuality?
I think there are three reasons that homosexuality is such a debatable issue. First, homosexuality has been discussed in the Bible as wrong and for Christians to refuse what the Bible is saying is wrong. Second, if people would approach homosexuality Biblically and realize it is a sin but also realize that there is more than one way to sin (and they themselves are sinners), then much of the debate would be quelled. Finally, our society has long kept homosexuality as a quiet personal matter, and to now make it publicly acceptable is perceived by many as flaunting immoral behavior. So, yes is the issue of homosexuality is related to how people perceive morality, but it also has other factors affecting the issue.

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

A reflection on Dingle, Ireland's BlasketIsland:


Dingle Bay just may be deserving enough to be the eighth wonder of the world, for its wild and natural beauty. Dingle Bay is the setting for a jaw dropping era of Ireland’s history; it is the home to the Blasket Island. This astonishing part of Ireland’s landscape stretches three miles long and three-fourths a mile wide. The Island is famous for the brilliant writers who resided there during 1920s and 30s. The Blasket writers were inspired by those who lived among them in their Blasket community and their way of life.

It is said that life has existed on and around the Island for about two to three thousand years; however, the first written account of people living on the Island was in 1735-6. The largest population to ever reside on the Island was 176 people in 1916. The Blasket village was separated into two halves, the higher and the lower parts. The higher village was where the King Pats Icky lived, visitors stayed, and where the fields were located, north of the village. There was never a church on the Island, a Parish would visit occasionally, and Mass was held at the schoolhouse. The small community would receive mail on Tuesdays and Fridays via postmen by boat, weather permitting (Thomson 14). There were never many houses on the Island, the most that there were, never exceeded 30. One would find the kitchen to be the largest room in a house, for it was the gathering place for the family and entertaining, as well as housing the animals during poor weather. The Islanders also would bring in their animals for a source of heat when the winds were bearing down hard and it was exceptionally cold. The homes on also only had one door, unlike those which were on the mainland in Dingle; there were periods of bad weather which families could not open their door for sometimes a week or more. Furthermore, the more modern houses of the 19th century on the Island had slate roofing.

The Islanders were fully dependent on the sea and land for their livelihood. In the fields they would grow potatoes and a little bit of rye and oats because it was so difficult due to the sandy terrain (www.dingle-pennisula.ie 3). It was not until after the mainland visitors started coming that more vegetables such as carrots and lettuce were grown (www.dingle-pennisula.ie 3). Most of the residents depended on the sea for fishing; they would fish for Horse-Mackerel and Spring-Mackerel as well as Lobster and crayfish. The Mackerel fishing was essential because there was a high need for it in America, so they take it by boat three miles to the mainland, Dingle and export it to American from there. However, when came to buying and selling in the Dingle marketplace, the Blasket traders, “…were under pressure to sell, even at a low price, because they needed money and they were under pressure to buy, even at a high price, because they needed the goods” (Thomson 81). Steam-trawlers from the mainland found the Blasket fisherman’s wealth, once they began to comb the sea-beds the many on Blasket left for America (Thomson 10). The Island had a flock of rabbits, which were hunted for food. There were some sheep, cows, pigs, and horses; however the male mules were used more than horses. It was very hard work to do any work let alone farm work, because of the steep hills and the dangerous rouge winds which were capable of blowing one off a cliff or hillside. After the famine struck in 1845 and the potatoes were destroyed, the people on Blasket had a saving grace. In 1850, “…a ship carrying wheat wrecked [just] off the Islands”(Thomson 6).
Many brilliant writers of classic literature resided on Blasket Island, over forty books were produced by the Blasket people. Early in the 19th century is when visitors from the mainland starting coming to the Island. It is thanks to George Thompson, who went to the Island originally to learn the Gaelic language, but also was one of the first from the mainland who encouraged the Blasket storytellers to record their works. Many of the brilliant storytellers such as Peig Sayers and Tomas O’Crohan, also a master fisherman, did not even know how to write in the Gaelic language let alone speak or write English, so they would dictate their stories to the more educated. Many of the people were indeed uneducated, at one time there was a school built on the Island, in 1866 there were sixty pupils in attendance, but by Christmas of 1941 there were only five pupils left. The writers told stories of their life on the Island which is also famous for being the most western tip of Europe. Originally the stories were told for pure entertainment and enjoyment; little did the Islanders know it would be their stories which made them go down in history.
The last of the Islanders were forced to on November 17th, 1953. Many of the Islanders made their way to Springfield, Massachusetts to live the “American Dream” and gain freedom from their tied down country. “America offered an escape from the poverty of their home life, but only on condition that they surrendered their cultural values…for a few the price came too heavy, and they [returned] home” (Thomson 83). The Islanders may have deserted the Island, but the legends and literary gifts from the Island will live on for many more generations.

Monday, March 06, 2006

Kat Walters:

I really enjoyed reading your controversy on Homosexual Marriage in the Catholic Church. I think you have done a great job finding useful support for the arguments that are presented in your controversy. Also the transitions really helped your paper flow, which made it very easy to follow. The purpose behind you writing this paper seems to be that you are interested in exploring this matter because of the beliefs of the Catholic Church supposedly loving everyone and treating everyone equally, therefore there should not be any discrimination in the Church.
I believe that there are some grey areas to the controversy that will be further ironed out as the research continues. However, the areas which have been discussed as the central attributes to the controversy include, the separation between church and state, the Pope and Vatican’s opinions
You definitely seem to have a thorough understanding of the controversy because of the support you have included. You seem to have ventured across the board to find all opinions regarding this controversy. I think that you have presented this controversy in a fair and accurate manner, though you have not really included your opinion if you have formed one thus far.
I think you could further discuss the community in general and more closely your personal community, perhaps your Church. You could possibly interview some members of your own Church or even your family members to see what they think about this controversy. I would also interview some of your friends who are Catholic and who are from a different area than you to see what they think. I would also include that this controversy is not only happening in the Catholic Church, and possibly explore other denominations and how they are handling it.
I think that your use of topic sentences is very effective in giving an overview of your paragraphs. Though there are some that can be strengthened simply by changing the wording. I would recommend paraphrasing some of your quotes and incorporating them different ways, see the handout Dr. Malesh gave to us in class. Your paragraphs can be longer by explaining the support you use very thoroughly.
The quotes that you provide the reader with are very effective, however they could be even more effective if you incorporate them better by paraphrasing them. I would also recommend incorporating interviews and exploring more sources. I truly cannot tell which side you are resting your opinion on, it is not clear to the reader. I would say to incorporate that as well, however the reader is definitely not pressured to either side of the controversy. .

Sunday, March 05, 2006

Style Lesson 3:

Williams concentrates on the lesson involving the principles of clarity. He specifically discusses two topics, Subject and Verb. As we read a story the subject is most likely the character and the verb is the action, however this is not always true.

I found a topic particularly interesting, which we have addressed in class and in this lesson Williams addresses it as well. The issue involves readers not being able to identify their unclear writings, which make it extremely difficult for the reader to understand. The reasoning that Williams gives to excuse the writer’s habit is that they often assume that the reader knows more about the topic at hand than they actually do. It is because of the writer’s background knowledge that they already have from researching the topic that creates the personal assumption of everyone having such background knowledge.
The lesson which Williams attempts to discuss is the importance of determining which sentences are too simple and the ones that are too complex. He says that it is essential to find a happy medium between the two types of sentences so that your works hold the utmost clarity. Furthermore, it is very importance to ensure each sentence’s clarity so that it easy for your reader to understand the message you are attempting to convey.

Posting for 3/4/06 My Resume:


Emily Anne Ford

COLLEGE ADDRESS HOME ADDRESS
R-MC Box 1389 1603 Boyce Drive
Ashland, VA 23005 Norfolk, VA 23509
(757) 646-3339 (757) 622-1863
eford@rmc.edu emilyaford@hotmail.com

Education
Bachelor of Arts
Major- English Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, VA Graduation May 2006
Irish College of Humanities Tralee, Ireland January 2005
Deans List

Work Experience
Management Intern, S. L. Nusbaum Realty Co., Norfolk, VA Summers 2004 & 2005
· Responsible for overall management of property
· Marketing communities toward maximum occupancy
· Performed a variety of administrative tasks
Tutor, Hanover County Schools, Ashland, VA, January 2003-Present
· Assist a Special Education class
· Aid special needs children in achieving set goals
· Tutor special needs children in reading, phonics, comprehension and language arts
Office Assistant, Virginia Turf Mgt., Portsmouth, VA, Summer& December 2003
· Assisted with Payroll while gaining skills on computer system
· Handled informational calls and pricing
· Delegated tasks to work crews
Crew, Harbor Tours Inc., Portsmouth, VA, Summers 2001, 2002 & 2003
· Ordered all merchandise and stock for all cruises
· Controlled cash flow and calculated profit at closing
· Assisted clients with arranging charters
· Oversaw employee scheduling
Office Assistant, Dominion Capital Mgt., Virginia Beach, VA, Summer 2002
· Organized data into computer system
· Aided Administrative staff

Student Leadership and Extracurricular Activities
Book Buddies
· Volunteer as a Reading Mentor to at risk elementary readers
Children’s Hospital of the Kings Daughters Circle-Member/President (2001-2002)
College Republicans
Group Workcamp- Mission Trip Royster Memorial Presbyterian Church
Habitat for Humanity
House Manager, Randolph-Macon College Literacy House
· Chaired the 2005 Frisbee Golf Tournament, to support Hurricane Katrina Relief
· Raised funds to provide local children with books
Participated with fundraising for Children Miracle Network
Washington Literary Society

Computer Skills
Proficient in Microsoft Word, Excel, Power Point, Corel Word Perfect, Internet Explorer, JavaScript, and Photo Plus 6.0.

Friday, March 03, 2006

A cont. of theatre journal, Chapter 3:

A Tragedy is a play where the hero attempts to teach the audience about “some profound truth about your life” (32). Not only can a tragedy make the audience feel proud of the central characters it also touches your heart. Often in tragedies people leave feeling as though they know more about themselves, they feel like they could relate some part of the play to their experiences in their own life.

The plays that touch us the least and that are most often attended are referred to as Melodramas. They provide great entertainment, for they teach the audience morals, though they tend to have rather complex plots. Though the plots are complex, the audience is still easily caught up in the story. Melodramas keep the audience on the ends of their seats with all the twist and turns of excitement. The music is a very important aspect of this type of genre, it “underscore[s] the action” (34). Melodramas does necessarily reflect the truths of life but better reflect what we wish life was like sometimes. Tom Markus believes that, “Melodrama provides a diversion from life’s real problems” (34).

The Tragicomedy leaves the audiences with feelings of frustration and agitation. This genre can best be described as a mix between a tragedy and a comedy. It was developed in the 20th century during the “Age of Anxiety,” this era still exists today. In today’s world we never know what is to come next, what is in store for us? During this particular play it “reflect[s] [the] truth of the human condition and try to make us feel anxious” (35).

Thursday, March 02, 2006

Theatre Journal Entry 7
Response to Chapter 3

There are six different types of plays, they are called genres. It is said that each type of genre creates different emotions from the audience. The six common genres include: Comedy, Farce, Drama, Tragedy, Melodrama, and Tragicomedy.

A Comedy of course makes an audience laugh and typically has a happy ending. Many find Comedies uplifting. There are three types of Comedy: high comedy, domestic comedy and low comedy. Many high comedies are classic plays, by playwrights such as Oscar Wilde. Domestic Comedies focus on middle class characters and involve embarrassing situations. An example of a low comedy is the film Dumb and Dumber.

An example of a Farce genre is the cartoon, Road Runner, which creates a lot of laugher. This type of genre “has a very fast tempo,” with its characters doing things they shouldn’t which result in them getting into lots of trouble. Farce genres usually involve some violence, which typically is silly violence where no one really gets seriously injured. Many compare a Farce genre to a low comedy; however, the difference is that in a Farce genre the improbable happens.
A Drama is of course a serious play, which many find depressing and certainly not uplifting. A Drama is based around a character who deals with a challenge, often times the audience is captivated into the characters struggle as well. Audiences love to watch such performances because it always them to be emotionally involved, yet not personally involved.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

First Draft of Paper:

There are many controversies that exist in the Church, perhaps the most controversial topic being, homosexuality. Though this may not be the most talked about issue it tends to be the issue behind many underlying problems. This particular issue appealed to me because it has torn my Presbyterian Church apart. The controversy of homosexuals worshiping among heterosexuals in the Presbyterian Church revolves around each side’s perceptions.

In this particular community many of the members are traditional, conservative people, who wish to worship in that type of environment. Many of the parishioners feel as though homosexual couples should not be welcome to worship among the members of the church. Homosexuals are arguing why they should be discriminated against when all they wish to do is worship the God they share with their neighbors. They feel as though the church should be a haven where they can be accepted and their sexual orientation should not matter. The controversy continues on with many issues arising contributing to a deeper more passionate debate.

This issue has plagued many church communities around the world, in particular the Presbyterian Church. Keith Hartman states, “Homosexuality is the most divisive element facing the Church today” (Hartman, x). It has openly been an issue since the early 70s. Some suggest that the Presbytery is “escaping from its previous morals,” and that is the real issue at hand, not homosexuality, yet it is something else (Ashbaugh, 1). The Presbyterian denomination has always been known for not interoperating the Bible in such a literal sense, however
recently more parishioners are often doing so. These are they more open people, including the homosexual community. There are still those conservative members who exist that wish for policies and traditions to not be change or updated. It is not uncommon for heated debates to arise every couple decades, because people fear that the Church is wandering away from their stated principles. Perhaps it should be said that the Presbytery will not allow any Presbyterian Church to open its doors for a ceremony uniting a same sex union. Furthermore, a Presbyterian minister cannot perform a same sex ceremony that will be recognized as a marriage. Some feel as though by accepting homosexuals into the church, they would be destroying the Presbyterian ministry.

Some parishioners who admit to having difficulty with the issue hold many differing opinions for their beliefs. Some feel that homosexuals come to the Church to make a statement. They specifically refer to homosexual couples displaying their affection for each other while in church. On the other hand, homosexuals feel that if the world does not see them labeled by their sexual orientation, but rather by name and face, others would be more accepting of their sexuality. They feel as though the Church should be the last place where they should be discriminated against. One man who served as an elder in his Presbyterian Church believes that, “If the church is to fully do its job of reconciliation among people and between the human family and God, I it must support gay people by helping them accept their sexuality and to express it lovingly. Needless to say, the church cannot do this without full acceptance of gay people themselves as healthy and complete persons” (Scanzoni, 40).

The most traditional parishioners who do not wish to worship with homosexuals make arguments from the Bible. Many use the Old Testament as evidence saying that homosexuality is wrong and should be frowned upon. Scripture from Leviticus 18:22 says, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination”. Later in Leviticus 20:13 it states, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them”. Many refer to the chapter of Genesis, which supposedly condemns homosexuality, referencing 19:1-11. A female homosexual minister opposes such arguments saying, “The scripture makes it clear in Genesis that God’s creation has unlimited variety, and we are part of that variety. God looked at his creation and saw that it was good” (Scanzoni, 41). Homosexuals argue that this is not condemning all homosexual practices, it condemns such in “the context of gang rape, idolatry, and lustful promiscuity” (Scanzoni, 111).

Many scholars believe that Christians find this topic of homosexuality in the Church for three main reasons. Many deal with the difficulty because of “social and psychological reasons…religious considerations…and informal reasons” (Scanzoni, 45). Other parishioners have more minor arguments, perhaps from insufficient knowledge of homosexuality. Some feel that it is inappropriate for their children to witness homosexual couples interacting, they feel that it provokes interest that they wish for their young eyes to not see. Another complaint is, why homosexual couples can’t worship in a more liberal environment, perhaps they would be more comfortable among those who have the same views as they do. They do not understand why they are rocking their church’s world, and why they wouldn’t worship where people are more accepting of their sexual orientation.

Homosexuals argue that they want to worship in the Presbyterian denomination for their own reasons. Many simply want to worship in the faith that they were raised worshipping with their families, therefore they wish to continue the tradition. Others feel that they are part of the community that surrounds the church and want to worship among their neighbors. Most importantly they want go to Church for the same reasons heterosexuals do, they want to worship God and repent their sins just as the everyday person does.