<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />May 1, 2005
 
                                             Open Letter to Mel White
 
Dear Mel:
 
I see you and your Soulforce organization are coming to Colorado Springs in early May  to picket Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family.  I have no idea what you plan to accomplish since the citizens of Colorado Springs already know where Dr. Dobson stands on the issue of homosexuality and gay-marriage so you must have something else in mind.  Would you care to share it?
 
What surprises me about your newly created Soulforce organization is your merger of Martin Luther King, Jr. and India=s Gandhi.  Certainly you must know that both men were much closer to Dr. Dobson=s position on homosexuality than yours.   As far as I know neither were pro-homosexual. In fact, Dr. King was strongly anti-homosexual as are most African-Americans. 
 
You seem not to know that Gandhi was not only anti-white, but also strongly anti-black (see G. B. Singh, Gandhi: Behind the Mask of Divinity and a two-page article in the Colorado Springs Gazette, August 24, 2004, p. L1,2).  When Gandhi was in the military (with the rank of Sergeant Major) he fought the blacks in South Africa.  If Gandhi was such a racist why are you partnering with him?
 
Incidentally, contrary to popular opinion Gandhi was a far cry from being the apostle of non-violence.  His role in the Bombay massacres and his direct  cover-up of the murder of the American William F. Doherty should give Dr. Dobson pause if you are planning to imitate Gandhi!  Dr. Dobson will certainly need to upgrade his security.  And remember it was Gandhi who said, AIf we had the atom bomb we would have used it against the British.@
 
On your web page you have a statement that says, AGLBT People Under Attack.@  I take it you are calling for the civil marriage of gays and lesbians?   But what about the B (bisexuals) and T (transgender).  Are you calling for bisexual marriages?   You know that would entail at least 3 at the altar.  And you would need 4 at the altar if you are advocating transgender marriages.  And don=t  forget you have the Q (Queer) crowd to consider, too.  I=m sure some are feeling left out with all this talk of Gay and Lesbian marriages, although I did read an article from one recently  saying he is having too much fun to get married.  The truth is Mel that there are dozens of possible marriage combinations and you know it. In fact, liberals are now toying with 5 to 10 genders alone.  Dr. Dobson knows it too and is, therefore,  defending the traditional and Christian  marriage arrangement between a man and a woman.  An arrangement that you will find in your Bible (Genesis 2:24; Mark 10:6-8; Ephesians 5:31). 
 
 

 
By the way, if Dr. Dobson interprets the Bible to read that homosexuality is sinful (Genesis 19; Romans 1) why doesn=t he have the right to his opinion?  In this new post-Christian era of Ano truth@ postmodernism what difference does it make what he believes or says on the radio?  It=s all relative anyway, isn=t it? You and your homosexual friends  are simply flying under the banner of postmodernism because under any common sense definition of truth there could never be such a thing as homosexual, bisexual and transgender marriages.  You are manipulating language to fit your ideology. 
 
You are calling for the civil right to legal marriage for individuals and groups who have never qualified for legal marriage, and are demanding they be given special status for this civil right.
 
In 1964 the U.S. Supreme Court established four criteria to identify people who were to qualify for minority or special status.  This criterion was as follows: there had to be clear evidence of discrimination of an identifiable group in the fields of education and economics.  The group had to be politically powerless to affect their situation, and for the most part there was to be a clearly identifiable, immutable physical characteristic so society could identify a person who was entitled to qualify for this special status.  Sexual orientation meets none of these requirements!
 
Your GLBTQ personages insist they can only be identified by a self-alleged sexual desire alone.  This would be utter chaos if special status were to be awarded on such a flexible, variable, subjective standard. 
  
In other words, Mel, your Soulforce organization is a total contradiction, and your attempt to acquire minority status for sexual orientation is indefensible.  Homosexual militants are not a  true Aoppressed minority,@ but instead are wealthy, members of Congress, bishops in the church, and indeed are special interest political power brokers.
 
Sincerely in Christ,
 
 
David A. Noebel, President
Summit Ministries