Lessons Learned from my real-life tale of kissing dating goodbye

Because Valentine's Day approaches, I'm writing today about my real-life experience of Kissing Dating Goodbye. In the late nineties, Joshua Harris wrote a popular, sometimes controversial book called I Kissed Dating Goodbye. The basic premise was this: dating sets you up for marriage failure because it essentially teaches you to be a serial monogamist. Christians who are serious about marrying only one person for life shouldn't date until they're ready for marriage -- and it shouldn't look like modern dating; it should look like traditional courtship, where marriage is the goal of the relationship from the start, and physical involvement (if there is any) should be taken seriously and entered into extremely gradually. Sex, of course, was saved for marriage, but some members of the courtship movement would save kissing for the altar; some even saved holding hands. Together with the True Love Waits  movement, I Kissed Dating Goodbye was all part of the sexual purity message that any youth-group kid of the nineties will be familiar with.

The "I kissed dating goodbye," movement seems strange to both Christians and non-Christians, and it seemed strange to me, too, when I first heard about the book as a sophomore in High School. While I was a dedicated Christian and quite indoctrinated by the "True Love Waits" movement, I thought that giving up dating was dumb and looked suspiciously like a form of legalism. Then I read the book, and much to my surprise, the book was, as Joshua Harris puts it on his website today, more about "living your life for God" than about dating. I felt that familiar, gut-twisting feeling that Christians call "conviction," and I knew that dating, at this point in my life, was not something I needed to do. I wasn't ready for marriage yet, and being in relationships was distracting me from God. So, at 16 years old, I kissed dating goodbye. And it was probably the most important decision of my life. Here's why:

1. While I still had crushes on guys and wished I could date them, my life wasn't all about boys. I focused on academics, on youth group, and on the extracurricular activities I loved, such as drama and choir. I read classic literature, I wrote and recorded my first album in a home studio with my dad, and began to perform music across the city. If I had been dating, I probably would have been hanging out with a guy instead of developing myself as a person and an artist. And guess what? If you are well-developed person, you'll actually have something to talk about when you do start dating.

2. I learned to be friends with guys. This has proven to be a great life skill. It's important to know how to relate to the opposite sex without being distracted by sex. I learned that I really enjoyed hanging out with and having conversations with guys, and this became even more important when I got to college.

3. I didn't let a guy determine my college choice, and I didn't have to go to college with the baggage of a High School Boyfriend.

4. I avoided a lot of heartbreak. Sure, there was still some heartbreak, especially of feeling that I wanted to date people, but knowing that it wasn't the right time, and I'm sure I sent some mixed signals to guy friends I was interested in but felt I "couldn't" date. But because I didn't date, I avoided the deeper emotional attachments that somehow entwine themselves with physical attachments; moreover, it's a lot easier to practice sexual abstinence when you're not dating someone.

5. I was friends with my now husband, who I met in college, for over a year before I knew he was interested in me romantically. Since I wasn't interested at the time, we remained friends for a total of 5 years before we ever dated. Now I admire his persistence and patience, and he probably didn't appreciate being "just friends" at the time, but I have to say, being good friends with my husband before becoming romantically involved was probably the best gift our marriage could have been given. Because we were friends first, we learned that we were intellectually compatible, that we could have great conversations, that I could watch Star Wars with him and that we knew the same Simon and Garfunkel songs, all without the haze of post-makeout-oxytocin clouding our brains. Because we were friends, we learned to laugh together and to appreciate each other even without the best clothes and flawless hairstyles that we would have worn on dates. We learned to see each other as complete humans, not just members of the opposite sex who could fulfill our romantic fantasies. When we finally dated, our brains and bodies were concerned with very different things than getting to know one another as friends, and the choice to get married was easier, knowing that decision was based on more than the primary urge of two twenty-something virgins.

Don't get me wrong; there were downsides to not dating; it was lonely at times, and as I got older, it became harder to be friends with guys, as I often viewed them, Jane Austen style, as potential husbands before I even got to know them. Also, not-dating can set up marriage as some sort of Holy Grail that will solve all problems -- and viewing marriage in this way can imperil the marriage. I was never as strict with the non-dating as Joshua Harris; I simply delayed dating until marriage was a viable option, not until I was sure I would marry whoever I was dating, so my experiment with "courtship culture" was not quite as dramatic as some in the movement. But looking back, I now believe that kissing dating goodbye set my marriage up for success. 

Gay Rights and the 2014 Sochi Olympics

As the host of the 2014 Olympics, Russia has been under the microscope in a way it likely hasn't been before. This is not uncommon for host nations of the Games, but Russia, it seems, has taken the corruption cake, fulfilling what had been up till now a sleepy stereotype most of us had forgotten. (You can read about the billions of dollars supposedly spent on the Games that have "gone missing," fattening the wallets of corrupt politicians, the unpaid workers, security issues, and long-term environmental destruction all adding up toward what Relevant Magazine rightly calls "The Hidden Cost of the Winter Olympics.")

Many people have decided to abstain from watching the Olympics in reaction to this news, and while many others might dismiss such a reaction as worthless---"What good will it do? What change will it affect?"---I believe it is a reasonable reaction: the right thing is not always, or even often, the pragmatic thing to do. I also think it's a personal choice and that there's no One Right Way to respond; there is no singular Christian Response. (I probably will watch the Games when I can pull myself away from the mounds of doctoral work already piling up this semester.) To not respond, however; to not care, to numb ourselves... this, I think, would be wrong.

That Russia is under the microscope at all is, in fact, a good consequence of its hosting the Olympics (more than it's a reason they shouldn't be hosting). Hopefully, the global scrutiny will prompt change. Hopefully, this will prove true of wherever the Olympics are hosted, presently and in the Games to come.

Out of that long list of terrible wrongs in Relevant's article above, if only one thing changes in Russia, I hope it's the government-sanctioned terrorism practiced against homosexuals.

I often hear the argument that Gay Rights is not a civil rights issue. In the US, the struggle for Gay Rights is often compared to the African American struggle in this country, particularly the Civil Rights Movement of the 50s and 60s. For the most part, the large majority of the black community resent this comparison, pointing out that the centuries-long horrors of slavery, Jim Crow, and government-sanctioned vigilante terrorism far outweigh the struggles of the LGBT community.

On the one hand, this argument is spot on, especially, perhaps, in this country---the scale is not the same. This reasoning, however, is often extended (by communities of all ethnic stripes) to claim that Gay Rights is not a civil liberties issue at all. And that doesn't follow.

On the other hand, while the scale still isn't the same---Adam Thomason's "5 Reasons Gay Is Not the New Black" is right: nothing compares to 200 years of slavery---when I saw the following Human Rights Watch video documenting the government-sanctioned vigilante terrorism openly, proudly inflicted upon homosexual men and women in Russia, I was strongly reminded of the horrors of the Long Civil Rights Movement (that is still, while on a different scale, is being fought) here the US.

The video below reminded me of the organized vigilante groups (including but not limited to the Ku Klux Klan) who beat, sexually assaulted, bombed, and lynched innocent African American women, men, and children with little to no fear of police interference or litigated socio-moral accountability. Onlookers in the mainstream white community watched with approval, even excitement (or looked the other way and said nothing, or told black folks to "be patient"). The vast majority of the South's white police officers sympathized with and even aided vigilante bombings and lynchings, and when a Klansmen, for example, was indicted, he had little to fear from the courtroom: all-white, all-male juries deliberated over murder trials for a matter of mere minutes before returning verdicts of “Not guilty.”

The similarities don't end there, and I could write a much longer article analyzing them. But for now, I challenge you to watch the video below and tell me Gay Rights isn't about civil rights.

This kind of violent LGBT oppression is not unique to Russia. (If you can stomach it, this video documents the extreme police brutality exhibited against gay men in Kyrgyzstan.) It isn't unique to Eastern Europe either, but that part of the world, and especially Russia is, as I've said, under the microscope thanks to the Olympic Games.

I fervently pray the awareness will instigate change. Even in this country where homosexuals are still violently bullied, though thankfully without government approval; and where, speaking of government approval, several states, including my state, Texas, do not offer legal protection to someone who has been fired from his or her job because of his or her sexual orientation.

Gay is not "be the new black," as catchy (and offensive) as that phrase is, but homosexuals all over the world endure very real and serious infringements upon their civil liberties, often while facing (in stark contrast to the African American community) additional ostracization from their churches and families---and that's something Christians cannot afford to respond to with the "appalling silence of the good."

A Land of Immigrants

This weekend Coke caused a big stir by having “America the Beautiful” sung in multiple languages. Sadly, many people were upset by their decision. The way I see it, the artistic commercial can be understood as doing two things:

1.  It shows that people from multiple nationalities see something special about our country.
2. It shows that our country is beautiful in its diversity.

People from all over the world come to America with dreams of starting a new life in. We live in a land of immigrants. Everyone here originally came from somewhere else. America is a place where people of all nationalities and languages can melt together creating an ever changing tapestry of culture. Part of the beauty of America is that it is unique place that never stays the same for very long. In one sense our tradition is that everything is always changing.

The commercial is artistic. It makes a bold statement. It highlights our diversity and the unique way in which people outside America envision life here.

How does this video help Christians understand taking the Gospel to all people, even in just this country? How does it remind us to become all things to all people? In what ways does the negative reaction to the commercial from some remind us of the war we wage with the sinful attitudes and practices of the world?

No, I'm not Just Going to Church Because I was Raised that Way

"You're only a Christian because you were raised as one," he shouted at the top of his lungs, "if your parents were another religion you'd believe in that!"

Nonsense.

And, yes, someone actually screamed this at me in public after I casually mentioned that I attend church. That sort of sanctimonious, hateful religious talk isn't just for nutty street preachers, anymore. Plenty of "enlightened" people have given me an earful of violent rhetoric for my beliefs (even though I'm never pushy about my religion). I recommended that we talk about something else, but he kept yelling at me, certain that I was following blindly the ideas of my childhood.

That's insulting. Does he think he's the only person who ever questioned anything?

Everyone rebels. Every teenager fights back against their parents' worldview. Kids who grow up in church always reach the point of questioning their faith. Why not? We are taught in church to question everything and to be skeptical of religious claims. (At least, non-cultish churches do that.)

The grown-ups you see in church are people who questioned the convictions of their parents and, after a period of soul searching, came to believe in God on their own. And that's just the ones who were actually raised in church - plenty of Christians I've known were not brought up in Christian homes. They, too, questioned the ways of their parents.

Cynics tell me that I'll change my mind if I learn more, but I feel like I've read it all. I've enjoyed the philosophers, like Plato, Plotinus, and Cicero, and I love the scientific writings of Hawking and Stephen J. Gould as well as Galileo and Darwin. And I've read more books on theology and church history that I can count. Every possible argument against God has come to my attention and I have considered them all. I read whatever I can about Christianity from every point of view possible because I think that is the best way to understand it.

I don't mind if you disagree with me, but stop insisting that I'm just a product of my surroundings as if atheists are the only skeptical people. Everyone questions their upbringing - that's human nature. Church goers are not unthinking sheep, but people who searched for answers and decided that God was out there, after all.