I had a different idea for what my final article in The Daily Campus before graduation would be about, but I had to scrap it when I read Tuesday’s paper. It’s not like I didn’t think I’d be having this kind of exchange when my article, “Why I chose to be gay,” ran last Wednesday, but I guess I just assumed that the hateful statements wouldn’t be coming from a vocal performance major. In my deeply personal article, I shared stories of my childhood and the struggle that I went through in coming to terms with my sexuality. I was inspired and humbled by all the e-mails that I received from people who related to my story and thanked me for sharing it. Yesterday, Matthew Esquivel wrote a response to my piece entitled, “Why I chose to be a child of God.” He sent me a polite e-mail notifying me of its publication, and I’m glad he did. OK, maybe I’m not so glad that I had to read it, but I’m elated that I get this chance to respond. While I’m sure his article was written from an honest and caring place, it is offensive and out of touch with reality.
To begin, the title alone implies that anyone who identifies as anything but heterosexual is not a child of God. I would like to hope that this isn’t the sort of message that any Christian would like to be sending. Whether Matthew Esquivel likes to admit it or not, he is gay. Men who are attracted to men and women who are attracted to women are homosexuals. He may choose to live his life asexually (Lord only knows why), but that cannot change his sexual orientation. His assessment that “the term homosexual describes what a person does, not who a person is,” sounds more like an attempt to distance himself from…well, himself, rather than anything based in the truth. I can’t blame him though. I would also still be running from homosexuality if I thought of it as he does. The fact that he would find it appropriate to compare the love I have for my partner to the actions of liars, murderers and adulterers is a perfect illustration of what is so incredibly wrong in this world.
As a liberal Democrat, I respect the right of all people to express their opinions and beliefs, regardless of how much I disagree with them. And as much as it pains me to think that Matthew Esquivel will go through his entire life ignoring his own natural feelings, I completely respect his right to do so. It’s just important to me that people get both sides of an argument and hear that it is possible to both be gay and believe in God. There are many churches, even in our area, that would find Esquivel’s statements to be deeply offensive and in opposition to Christian teachings.
One of the e-mails that I received last week came from someone who was still dealing with the scars from being taken to psychiatrists and given medications in their parents’ attempt to “fix” them. Another response came from an SMU alum, a fraternity member who spent a large portion of his time in college drinking, trying to cope with the pain that came along with hiding his sexuality. No one deserves to feel that way, and as much as I respect Matthew Esquivel’s right to live his life in the manner that he chooses and to share his opinions in the same way that I share mine, I do not respect his message. His message is one of ignorance and is rooted in bigotry.
I am not a liar, a murderer or an adulterer. I am a kind and caring male who happened to fall in love with another kind and caring male. I could choose to never touch him, never hold his hand, hug him or kiss him goodnight. I could choose not to hold him when he’s sad or tell him how much I love him, but it wouldn’t change the fact that I do. It wouldn’t change me, my sexuality or my status as “a child of God.” So, much to the disappointment of Matthew Esquivel and anyone else who thinks I should live my life pretending to be something I’m not, I choose a life of authenticity and happiness. I choose to be.
Curtis Hill is a senior advertising major. He can be reached for comment at curtishill@gmail.com.
