“why I AM not”
by Shawn Davis
The beginning of the ‘I AM’ video features the names of adolescents who killed
themselves after being bullied for their sexuality, then proceeds to spin the bullying
of LGBT students into a larger message about bullying in general. Indeed, these
deaths are terrible and ought not to have occurred. But why this sudden focus on
bullying? Why now? Why these teens? What about those who have committed
suicide from time immemorial after being bullied because of their race, religion,
appearance, or disability? A Croatian girl in Ohio recently committed suicide after
being bullied for her accent and unique name. Her bullies then attended her
memorial service and mocked at her casket. Why is her story or those of countless
others not as remarkable as the LGBT students’? The real question is: Would this
anti-bullying movement even have started were it not for the bullying of LGBT
students?
If it weren’t for its ties to the LGBT agenda, it would be much easier for everyone to
embrace this movement, rather than just those whose views align with those of the
LGBT community. As it is, the anti-bullying cause appears to be a clever way of
socially legitimizing the LGBT agenda in a way in which dissenters are easily
villainized. After all, who would stand in favor of bullying? The ‘I AM’ movement
clouds the moral issue by pressuring people to subscribe to the anti-bullying theme
while sneaking in the LGBT agenda through the back door, the vague T-shirt and
wristband messages somehow serving to make the whole thing a little more
palatable to everyone.
What of someone like me, then, who thinks that the lifestyles of openly LGBT
students are immoral but that they ought not to be bullied for it, rather that their
views ought to be engaged in thoughtful and mutually respectful ways? Are the Tshirts and wristbands for someone with that sort of nuanced view? What about my
7-year-old son, a student in the district? He doesn’t have the maturity to wrestle
with LGBT issues, nor would it be appropriate for him to have to try. Are the Tshirts and wristbands for him? Marrying this anti-bullying movement to the LGBT
agenda has made it impossible to easily answer those questions, which is truly a
shame, because I for one would love to help promote an anti-bullying message and
teach my son to do the same. Instead, the message is so vague that we are left to
wonder exactly what we’re telling the world when we wear the message, ‘I AM’.
And what of the term, ‘I AM’? It has undeniable power, but it potency actually
extends much further than those wearing it may realize. In the Torah, or Old
Testament, the term ‘I AM’ (all caps) is used by God whenever he refers to himself
by name. When God first instructs Moses to lead the Israelites out of slavery, Moses
asks God who he should tell the Israelites has sent him. God replies, “I AM WHO I
AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you’” (Exodus
3:14). Much is wrapped up in the term – it reveals God’s everlasting nature and
total dominion over all that exists. The original term, ‘YHWH’, used throughout
Hebrew scripture, is typically translated into English as “the LORD” (again, all caps),
but its more literal translation is ‘I AM’. Its correct Hebrew pronunciation is often
debated today because ancient Jews so revered the name ‘I AM’ that they would
dare not even speak it aloud.
The loose application to our school’s anti-bullying movement of such a religiously
powerful phrase, while unintentional, ought to give us pause. ‘I AM’ wearers should
know that to a Jew or Christian they appear to be proclaiming their own deity, an act
that could be construed as more than merely offensive.
The LGBT roots of this movement and its ‘I AM’ mantra make it impossible for it to
be universally embraced, which is a shame. An anti-bullying movement ought not to
pay undue homage to one group while alienating another - it should be something
we can all support.