Jeff Ward: Wheaton College is No. 1 in the Nation! (In Bias Toward Gays) And That's the Biblical Truth

The Princeton Review research is silly, but the Wheaton College response is worse.

It’s a rare feat for one of our illustrious Patchland institutions to come out on top of a national ranking. Actually, in this case, it’s not so rare. This sanctum of higher learning was No. 1 in 2009 and it generally finishes in the top 10!

Yes! Once again, the Princeton Review named Wheaton College the country's least tolerant university toward gay and lesbian students. Why do I suddenly feel like issuing a Colbert-esque “We’re No. 1”?

Of course, we should try to keep this semi-rare honor in perspective. After all, the award was issued by a "Review" from an utterly mediocre educational institution. Name one NBA player that ever graduated from Princeton! The only time I ever pick up their Review is when I want to see how fast I can fall asleep.

This “poll” ain’t exactly scientific, either. In the 80-question survey sent out to 122,000 college students, the single query used to determine gay tolerance was, “Do you agree or disagree that students, faculty, and administrators treat all persons equally regardless of their sexual orientation and gender identity/expression?”

Most college students don’t have the attention span to make it through that sentence, and if they did, don’t you think it’s a wee bit subjective? You’d think they’d have first asked the responder if he or she knows even one gay student. Ah, well! What do you expect from a bunch of confused Ivy Leaguers who settled for Princeton because they couldn’t get into Yale?

But instead of letting this absurdity go, as they should have, Wheaton College couldn’t resist issuing a response.

“Our goal is to follow God’s truth, including what the Bible says about sexual ethics,” they said in a statement, “While some may interpret this stance as hostility to the LGBTQ community, our aim is to stand respectfully and graciously for biblical truth.”

So now, I get to respond! Because anytime anyone quotes “biblical truth” it’s almost always a case of selective reading, which tends to make me cranky.

Let’s start with Leviticus 19:19, which issues a clear caveat against the use of mixed fibers, like polyester. Were this true, given their always-interesting fashion choices, our friends in Burr Ridge would be condemned to that pearly gates "down" escalator.

I have to say I’m looking forward to that new daily Wheaton College clothing tag check. “A cashmere sweater and linen slacks!? You get yourself home right now and change, young lady!”

Then we have Leviticus 20:19: “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death.”

So it’s capital punishment for anyone that hurls the “F” word at their parents? ... Can I plead insanity?

I have to admit I understand the logic behind Leviticus 15:19-20. To paraphrase, you can’t touch a woman, or anything she’s touched, during “that time of the month.” Any semi-intelligent male can attest to the dangers of getting within 3 feet of their spouse during that time, so most husbands follow this rule out of self defense. I usually just hide in the crawl space.

But taken to its logical extreme, I can’t wait to see how Wheaton College checks up on this one! That oughtta make the news.

I’m all for Leviticus 11:22, because I’m not so sure I could eat a locust without gagging anyway.

But my all-time favorite has to be Deuteronomy 25:11-12, which decisively declares, if a wife defends her husband by grabbing his attacker’s testicles, “Then thou shalt cut off her hand … ” (Kicking is OK!)

Personally, I think that’s a bit extreme, because any woman willing to protect me in that specific manner is certainly worth having around—especially if she’s got a good grip.

Please don’t even try that lame “there goes that crazy Leviticus” excuse on me again, because that’s the same section that outlaws homosexuality.

Now that we’ve taken care of all that, and considering the Wheaton College statement, there’s still the question of why any self-respecting gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans-gendered or sexuality questioning student would want to attend Wheaton College in the first place. Isn’t that a lot like Casey Anthony crashing a PTA meeting?

You know me! I follow in the footsteps of that great thinker, Bill Engval, whose compelling philosophy goes something like this: “If it wasn’t for the sex, I could be gay. Then you're just hangin’ out with your buddies.”

I’ve said it before! I don’t want to know what goes on in your bedroom because my own terrifies me enough as it is. I’ve got much bigger things to worry about than who’s doing what to whom. Go ahead and marry your Dodge Charger if that’s your thing—just promise me you'll keep the garage door shut.

But talk about rushing in where angels fear to tread! We all know that many self-prescribed religious folk can be notoriously intolerant.

The irony is, I wasn’t going to put too much stock in a silly survey a bunch of Princeton nerds came up with until Wheaton College had to go ahead and prove them right! So let’s drop the anti-gay pretense, because if your “aim” truly is to “stand respectfully and graciously for biblical truth,” then it’s an all-or-nothing proposition.

You want the real truth? Picking only those prohibitions that fit your world view is even worse than wearing polyester.

ehbuttocks September 02, 2011 at 10:05 PM
Why is Princeton producing a list of good and bad schools for gay people? Did they only use the student fees of gay students to do it with, or is Princeton an all-gay school anyway? What was the point of this in the first place?
John Schofield September 02, 2011 at 11:18 PM
The Princeton Review is a private training company, not the university Get off your buttocks and look it up.
David September 09, 2011 at 07:19 PM
Interesting article - nicely written and funny too. Even more interesting is the hornet's nest it stirred up. Can I suggest for your next article - "Which religion is right, and why all the others are wrong".
currentwheatonstudent April 13, 2012 at 11:03 PM
The New Testament does condemn homosexuality....Romans 1.
MILTON PD April 13, 2012 at 11:55 PM
If a straight person gets involved with a gay person - that is a sin (wrong). If both people are gay then I see no reason to be against it. Don't tread on gay Americans......and yes Obama is a joke.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »