Mentioning the condom was huge! Here was an adult to whom this boy just ‘confessed’ his actions, and the adult doesn’t flip out on him. Instead, having already established that KJ thinks the boy shouldn’t be out on school nights, he offers advice that says this is a medical / health issue, not a pathology.

Who’s Brewster going to turn to next time there’s an issue in his life? Not the teacher who goes ballistic, no, he’s going to go to the teacher who doled it out at the pace the boy could handle.

Bravo, Jennings. That’s the moment that made all the difference.

The instant NOM, IFI, CWA and the rest are forced to acknowledge that being gay for some of us is perfectly normal and that LGBT* people can and do form and maintain healthy and productive families, at that moment those groups will cease to have any relevancy.

At that moment I expect those groups to begin the campaign to rehabilitate themselves and rewrite history. They will attempt to seize the credit for ending society’s persecution of gays while deflecting all responsibility for extending that persecution long beyond the time when it would have otherwise ended.

One of religion’s specialties seems to be the seizing of all credit for things deemed positive while deflecting any responsibility for things deemed negative.

The instant NOM, IFI, CWA and the rest are forced to acknowledge that being gay for some of us is perfectly normal and that LGBT* people can and do form and maintain healthy and productive families, at that moment those groups will cease to have any relevancy.

That fits with something that occurred to me as I was thinking more about this story. Jennings was a teacher, and, whether or not his advice was good, he was apparently a dedicated teacher. He also happens to be gay. He also never had any charges of misconduct brought against him. For most of us that doesn’t come as a surprise, but NOM, IFI, CWA, and other groups with similar agendas can’t let it rest there. They have to have something to criticize, because the idea that someone can be a good teacher and also be gay is a threat to them. If he was a good teacher then Jennings undermines their baseless claim that homosexuals are inherently dangerous and a threat to society.

But, it’s a start. And, to the extent that general awareness grows about how anti-gay rhetoric exploits and harms kids, I’m convinced they’ll have to back off.—Steve

You make a good point though in my view these new tactics are just ploys to dodge mainstream criticism of messages that tend to cost NOM and other groups like it votes.

It should be abundantly clear that sunset is coming for NOM and all the other so-called “family” groups that have nothing to do with helping actual families. Children have been a convenient pick but even they are clearly being harmed by the likes of Gallagher et al and people are noticing.

The instant NOM, IFI, CWA and the rest are forced to acknowledge that being gay for some of us is perfectly normal and that LGBT* people can and do form and maintain healthy and productive families, at that moment those groups will cease to have any relevancy.

No anti-gay interest group or individual will do anything that even remotely signals a willingness to normalize homosexuality.
—David C.

Hey David… I’m not entirely convinced.

It seems to me that the anti-gay folks have had to reframe their rhetoric, giving up on attempts to re-criminalize sex and at least giving lip service like NOM’s #1 talking point starting with Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose.

For many, it may be more cynical than authentic — their pollsters and message-crafters tell them it’s necessary to win support.

But, it’s a start. And, to the extent that general awareness grows about how anti-gay rhetoric exploits and harms kids, I’m convinced they’ll have to back off.

The Brewster story is one of epiphany, the point at which Jennings came face to face with his own inadequacies to address the situation and the realization that no one else was doing anything for the Brewsters of the world.

His tale is not one of appropriate response, but rather one of highlighting a need for change. And Jennings did change, and in doing so he changed the world for thousands of other Brewsters out there.

No, it seems that the POINT of the story is that this isolated young man felt that his life was not worth living, and part of that was due to his isolation due to being gay.