The surest reason Kirk Cameron is wrong

File under Old News: Überevangelist Kirk Cameron has at last shown us his true colors, and they aren't pretty.

Cameron (by-now-)infamously informed Piers Morgan last week that homosexuality was "unnatural," "detrimental," and "ultimately destructive." A set of opinions to which he is entitled, however misinformed.

But asked to describe a course of action for how to talk with his children if one of them told his father that he or she is gay, Cameron veered into self-destruction.

Morgan: So what do you do if one of your six kids says, "Dad, bad news, I'm gay"?

Cameron: ... I'd sit down and I'd have a heart-to-heart with 'em, just like you would with your kids.

Morgan: If one of my sons said that, I'd say, "That's great, son. Long as you're happy." What would you say?

Cameron: Well, I wouldn't say "That's great son, long as you're happy." I'm gonna say, "There's all sorts of issues that we need to wrestle through in our life and just because you feel one way doesn't mean we should act on everything that we feel."

Morgan: And yet, some people would say that telling kids that being gay is a sin or getting married is a sin or whatever - that in itself is incredibly damaging and destructive and damaging in a country where seven states now have legalized it.

Cameron responded that Morgan was using a different standard of morality. That he (Cameron) acts under God's standard. Not Piers'.

Anyway. We've all seen the clips by now. The point is you don't abstract or moralize about standards when your children tell you something important about themselves that it took a lot of courage for them to come to you with. That's just cruel.

It's cruel because it's an intimate moment between two people who are important to each other, and how in that moment the parent (nervous, inarticulate, and socially paranoid about how he or she will be perceived) makes it about him- or herself and not about the child.

And that's true no matter what it is, whether it's sexual identity or anything else.

You might think this would go without saying, but some have tried to lionize Cameron's words, and you just can't. They're indefensible.

Comments (14)

I thought the surest reason was it was Kirk Cameron saying such things? Good thing he is not the interpreter of scripture for most of us.

Eric

"There's all sorts of issues that we need to wrestle through in our life and just because you feel one way doesn't mean we should act on everything that we feel."

Aside from showing his incredible ignorance, he also shows an appalling use of bad grammar!

-Cullin R. Schooley

I've got news for you. If that situation had ever happened in my life and my parents had told me what they thought I wanted to hear, they wouldn't have done me any favors. They would have been lying through their teeth.

Guess what, Torey. You don't know what the right answer is. So to invent one merely for the sake of not being perceived as "cruel" is a whole lot more than dishonest. That is what's truly cruel; lying to me so I won't get mad at you.

Stop the presses! Ex-child actor turned Bible thumper doesn't approve of homosexuality... I cannot understand why this rather sad has-been's comments have caused the stir they have - people with much more note-worthiness say things even more hateful daily. I suspect that in paying attention to him we are making his agent delirious with joy.

Christopher, my point was that it is senseless to treat a person as an abstraction, or to greet a person's admissions about him/herself with talk of moral standards. Telling someone what you do or don't want them to hear is beside the point. I'm not suggesting there is only one right answer - only that the one given was insufficient.

Torey Lightcap

I think this is very dependent on the age of the kid:

13-17 - interesting talk to be had
18-40 - "Yeah, we knew already"
40+ "What, you're gay? How did that happen?"

That said, the appropriate response for any parent is "regardless of all this I still love you."

While Mr. Cameron's opinion is of no greater value than any other person we would be unwise to not pay attention to the flowering social agenda being promulgated in the name of Christianity. As people have pointed out for the past two weeks, the GOP candidates should be talking about jobs, but they can't stop talking about sex. And just a the anti-gay anti labor agenda's popped up in Wisconsin and Ohio once people who ran on "its about the economy" platforms were elected, they are more than ready to do it all the more zealously if given all three branches of government to muck about with.

I've got news for you. If that situation had ever happened in my life and my parents had told me what they thought I wanted to hear, they wouldn't have done me any favors. They would have been lying through their teeth.

I'm trying to make sense of this statement, ChristopherJ. If one's parents think "That's terrible that you're gay, and we hate you for it", then that's what they should say?

The point isn't "Lie to your (despicable!) gay child", the point is "LOVE THEM as they are. Period."

JC Fisher

Man, an answer like that would give his kid Growing Pains.

Erik Campano

I do not find his statements offensive. I think it's a parent's obligation to discuss moral standards with a child. Is it not an abdication of the parent's role to discuss moral standards with a child who brings up an issue that scripture teaches has moral implications? Certainly the child can disagree and Cameron did not say that he would hate anyone for their feelings or inclinations.

an issue that scripture teaches has moral implications

...which "Dad, I'm gay" does NOT, Claire.

When you learn someone is left-handed, I think it goes w/o saying, that they can do sin OR righteousness w/ that left hand. Same w/ being gay.

JC Fisher

I agree with your second statement - that being gay does not equate to sinfulness.

But how can you argue that scripture does not take a stand on this?

Scripture does not speak about "gay" as we know it. It is mostly about idolatry and abuse of power or religious sex practices. There are no mutual loving relationships as we know them discussed.

Thank you for the clarification, Ann. Certainly idolatry, abuse of power and ritualistic sex practices are sinful. It is true that I am not aware of any prohibition on mutual loving relationships.

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space