Doesn’t this university’s decision send a message that LGBT persons are more emotionally fragile?

Share

“Allowing an Anscombe Society event could cause suicides, a student claims.”

An upcoming conference on heterosexual marriage is being denounced as hate speech by the Stanford Graduate Student Council (GSC), which is seeking to quash the event. Last week, the council at the top-ranked California university voted ten to two to deny funding for the event “Communicating Values: Marriage, Family, and Media,” sponsored by the Stanford Anscombe Society…. In the minutes (transcribed without editing), one student claims that “an event such as this would be a negative event, in schools that have negative events there is a statistically significant increase in suicide.”

(From Stanford Calls Traditional Marriage Conference ‘Hate Speech’, Denies Funding | National Review Online.)

I could raise a lot of questions about this, but for now I have just one: why is suicide a risk when people come to town talking about traditional marriage?

Call me naive, clueless, oblivious, or whatever, but I don’t get it. I’m open to being educated. Here’s why it puzzles me.

First, homosexuality is no longer professionally considered to be mentally or emotionally pathological, as it once was. Gays and lesbians are even celebrated in some cases as being more emotionally in tune than straights. Given that, they should exhibit emotional resilience at least on a par with straight people.

Second, while there’s considerable attention these days to the negative effects of bullying on gays and lesbians—and bullying in any form toward any person is wrong and harmful—this doesn’t appear to be a case of bullying, not even threatened bullying. It was to be an opposing viewpoint discussion instead.

Third, objective research and experience indicate that Christians and political conservatives face opposing viewpoints all the time on the college campus.

Fourth, there’s no evidence that Christians and political conservatives commit suicide more frequently in that environment than where their opinions are supported. (For those who suppose that living in a predominantly Christian culture explains Christians’ more positive responses, I urge you to look again at what it’s like on the college campus. There is a lot more anti-Christian bias there than you probably know.)

Add this all together, I can’t help wondering, doesn’t this send the message that LGBT persons are more emotionally fragile than straights?

It’s just a question. It flows out of the line of reasoning you see above, but I don’t want anyone to think I think I’ve got all the bases covered, all the right information in the mix, and so on. In other words it’s not a conclusion I’m reaching, it’s a question I’m raising. Doesn’t this send a message that gays and lesbians are more emotionally fragile? If not, what have I missed?

Or if I’m right, then why aren’t LGBT people protesting this negative message going out against them?

It sounds to me like they would rather tell the world they’re weak than listen to an individual tell them they might be wrong.

Do you see why this confuses me? I’d be glad if someone could help me understand it better.