Connect with us

News

Christian Union perpetuates culture of homophobia at elite universities

Matt Bennet founded organization in 2002

Published

4 years ago

on

(Image via Christian Union's Facebook page)

The Christian Union was founded in 2002 by CEO Matt Bennet to fight what he saw as the secularization of top universities and to raise up a generation of global leaders with Christian values. Since it established its first ministry program at Princeton University in 2002, Christian Union has established chapters at all eight Ivy League Schools, as well as at Stanford University and Harvard Law School. 

To most onlookers, the Christian Union appears to be a relatively benign presence on these campuses.

Christian Union’s Dartmouth College chapter, for example, until the middle of last year made waffles late on Friday nights to give to students walking home from Frat Row, and these “Christian waffles” made the group somewhat of a hit among the college’s partying community. Dartmouth Christian Waffles, which now operates independently of Christian Union, now makes the waffles.

Behind the Christian Union’s friendly aesthetic and glossy promotional materials, however, there is a sinister and well documented history of homophobia, and queer student members have felt the consequences of the organization’s fundamentalist approach to sex and sexuality.

In the wake of the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, the Christian Union Magazine published an article titled “After Obergefell: What Can the Church do?”, describing the ruling as “egregious” and calling on the church to reach out to “those with same-sex attraction and gender identity confusion” and help them form a “Biblical view of themselves.” Under all of the coded religious language, this means, at worst, praying the gay away, and at best, celibacy. 

On July 21, 2016, the Christian Union Magazine published an article titled “Christianity Can’t Be Stretched to Endorse Homosexuality,” directly in the wake of the Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando, Fla. Instead of mourning this instance of extreme violence against the LGBTQ community, the article launched into a defense of the organization’s non-affirming theology, arguing that a true Christian could never accept “gay sexual practices” while remaining faithful to the Bible.

This article is one of many on the topic of what the Christian Union calls “same-sex attraction” — even that phrase robs queer people of humanity and minimizes what it means to be gay — and all are available on Christian Union’s website for the world to see. However, the Christian Union is first and foremost an organization that engages with college students, and to understand the human impact of their fundamentalist theology, the Washington Blade reached out to several current and former Christian Union members about their experiences with the group. 

Darby Aono, who graduated from Yale University in 2017, became involved in Yale Christian Union at the end of her freshman year. She was invited to the group by a friend from her dorm, and Aono’s interactions with the first ministry fellow she met were overwhelmingly positive. She continued to get involved with Christian Union, including joining a Bible study later that year.

“I was at Yale over the summer, and I was invited to their Bible study, so I started going to that. There were definitely suspicious things — not about queer stuff, yet — but at that time they did not have women in leadership roles, and it was understood that were would not be,” Aono said. 

Valentina Fernandez is a current sophomore at Dartmouth College, and she shared that her experience with Christian Union at Dartmouth has been generally positive. But, similarly to Aono’s initial experience at Yale, Dartmouth’s chapter had an off-putting approach to gender.

Fernandez shared that everyone in the group was very welcoming during her first year, and as someone who was raised Christian but wasn’t very knowledgeable about traditions or the Bible, she was mostly there to find community.

“The reason why a lot of [sophomores], particularly girls, are not as involved this year is because apparently a girl can’t be president by herself — she needs to be co-president with a guy. And a lot of us were like, what?! I wish I knew more about that,” Fernandez said.

While the Christian Union’s approach to women in leadership was concerning for both Fernandez and Aono, it was when Aono started to question her own sexuality that more contentious conversations about queer identities started to surface within Yale Christian Union.

“I think it was maybe during my sophomore year, when I was like, oh, like, maybe I’m not straight. And so I would sometimes talk to my friend in my dorm who was in Christian Union, who originally invited me, and we would get into arguments about homosexuality,” Aono said.

“The party line of Christian Union at that time was ‘love the sinner, hate the sin,’ where we all sin, so we aren’t going to excommunicate anyone for feeling same sex attraction, but just don’t act on it. Don’t sin. I would say that was generally how people seemed to feel about it.”

Then, Aono joined a Christian Union book club, where they read Wesley Hill’s book “Washed and Waiting,” in which Hill advocates for gay Christians to live celibate.

“I don’t want to speak for everyone, but I will say I personally joined the book club because I knew I was queer,” Aono said. “A large part of the discussion was about how to acknowledge the fact that you experience same-sex attraction without acting on it.”

Aono described reading Bible passages in the book club about being gay alongside other passages about being a drunkard or a thief, and feeling a sense of deep incongruity between the two.

“I remember being in the book club and being like: Being gay just is categorically different than stealing. I don’t understand why those two things are listed together,” Aono said.

However, one of the most pivotal conversations about being queer during Aono’s time with the Christian Union happened in the wake of the Obergefell ruling. After seeing the articles Christian Union was publishing about homosexuality after the ruling, Aono reached out to Christian Union via email, asking them to stop spreading incorrect and harmful messages. This email is what got her a meeting with Chris Matthews, the ministry director of Yale Christian Union at the time.

“Somehow, the ministry director figured out that I had sent this email. And so eventually we ended up deciding to have a meeting. At first, we were just arguing about whether you could change the fact that you were gay. At some point, I basically came out to him as queer,” Aono recalled. “And he said, ‘I understand how you’re feeling, because when I was a teenager, I used to have sexual feelings towards office supplies, but I grew out of that.’ I didn’t even know what to say in response to that. I didn’t fight him, because I think I was too shellshocked.”

“I remember walking out of there and then having to go to a ‘welcome the freshmen to Christian Union’ event. And I was like, I don’t know how I’m supposed to go welcome some fucking freshmen after this,” Aono said.

While comparing being queer to being attracted to office supplies is a truly unique instance, moments of casual — and non-casual — homophobia are all too common in the Christian Union. This doesn’t mean that students don’t find meaningful community in the group, or that all of its members are non-affirming of queer people, but the organization itself has a long track record of unsupportive and sometimes outright discriminatory practices.

Harvard University’s chapter of Christian Union, called Harvard College Faith and Action, ignited controversy in 2018 for forcing a student leader to step down after finding out that she was in a celibate same-sex relationship. This led to HCFA being put on probation for violating the university’s anti-discrimination policies for student organizations, only to be re-recognized a year later, despite failing to disaffiliate from Christian Union as the college had required.

A recent Harvard graduate and former member of HCFA, who asked to remain anonymous due to privacy concerns, recalled being caught off guard by how non-affirming the organization was.

“I became interested in HCFA because of some racial justice work that they were doing,” they said. “I didn’t expect them to be fully affirming. I didn’t realize quite how bad it would be.”

A few months after HCFA pressured the student leader to step down for being in a same sex relationship, they again stirred controversy by inviting writer and self-identifying former lesbian Jackie Hill-Perry to Harvard to speak with Christian Union in February 2018. While HCFA characterized this as an “internal” event, Hill-Perry’s presence on campus drew attention, and protesters bearing rainbow flags showed up to the event.

Princeton University’s chapter of Christian Union had also hosted Jackie Hill-Perry in February 2017, so the practice of Christian Union paying a self-identified “speaker to preach on the sins of homosexuality was nothing new.” 

The recent Harvard graduate, who attended Hill-Perry’s Harvard speech, recalled the event and HCFA’s efforts to re-characterize it as an internal, scriptural conversation instead of an anti-gay public forum.

“It was very much spun as, she’s going to talk about Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane before he decided to sacrifice himself,” the graduate said. “The HCFA kept pushing the idea that this was going to be about this particular Bible story, which is a very important Bible story amongst Christians. Now, she did preach on that — and there was no program given before — but she very much preached on the immorality of same-sex relationships and how you can overcome same-sex attraction.”

Unlike Aono, who ended up talking with Yale Christian Union leadership about her concerns, the anonymous Harvard graduate recalled generally being ignored by HCFA leadership.

“I never got any meeting with any leadership. No one was pulling me into their office — I think they were just hoping I’d shut up,” they said. 

Like this former Harvard student, the Blade also had trouble getting a meeting with Christian Union leadership. Almost everyone to whom the Blade reached out to for this article declined to comment.

Don Weiss and Noah Crane, ministry directors at Harvard and Dartmouth, respectively, both declined requests for an interview. Multiple Dartmouth students who are or were Christian Union student leaders, and neither the communications staff of Christian Union nor Tyler Parker ever responded to multiple requests for comment. 

“I imagine a lot of people don’t want to talk to you because they were so incredibly damaged. I have no regrets — I’m glad that I brought this up because I have no idea if other people would have,” said the Harvard graduate. “I’m glad that people know that HCFA can be so harmful.”

Related Topics:
Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Gay Venezuelan man ‘forcibly disappeared’ to El Salvador files claim against White House

Andry Hernández Romero had asked for asylum in US

Published

17 hours ago

on

March 13, 2026

By

Andry Hernández Romero (Photo courtesy of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center)

A gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who the U.S. “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador has filed a claim against the federal government.

Immigrant Defenders Law Center, who represents Andry Hernández Romero, on Friday announced their client and five other Venezuelans who the Trump-Vance administration “forcibly removed” to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, filed “administrative claims” under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

The White House on Feb. 20, 2025, designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”

President Donald Trump less than a month later invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The White House then “forcibly removed” Hernández, who had been pursuing his asylum case in the U.S., and more than 250 other Venezuelans to El Salvador.

Immigrant Defenders Law Center disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.

Hernández was held at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT, until his release on July 18, 2025. Hernández, who is back in Venezuela, claims he suffered physical and sexual abuse while at CECOT.

“As a Venezuelan citizen with no criminal record anywhere in the world, I would like to tell not only the government of the United States but governments everywhere that no human being is illegal,” said Hernández in the Immigrant Defenders Law Center press release. “The practice of judging whole communities for the wrongdoing of a single individual must end. Governments should use their power to help every person in the nation become more aware and informed, to strengthen our cultures and build a stronger generation with principles and values — one that multiplies the positive instead of destroying unfulfilled dreams and opportunities.” 

Immigrant Defenders Law Center filed claims on behalf of Hernández and the five other Venezuelans less than three months after American forces seized then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, at their home in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital.

Maduro and Flores have pleaded not guilty to federal drug charges. Delcy Rodríguez, who was Maduro’s vice president, is Venezuela’s acting president.

‘Due process and accountability cannot be optional’

Immigrant Defenders Law Center on Friday also made the following demands: 

  • The Trump administration must officially release the names of all people the United States sent to CECOT to ensure that everyone has been or will be released. 
  • The federal government must clear the names of the 252 men wrongfully labeled as criminal gang members of Tren de Aragua.  
  • DHS (Department of Homeland Security) must end the practice of outsourcing torture through third‑country removals, restore humanitarian parole, and rebuild a functioning, humane asylum system.  
  • DHS must reinstate Temporary Protected Status for all individuals who cannot safely return to their home countries, halt mass deportations and unlawful raids and arrests, and guarantee due process for everyone navigating the immigration system.  
  • Congress must pass the Neighbors Not Enemies Act, which would repeal the Alien Enemies Act.   

“In all my years as an immigration attorney, I have never seen a client simply vanish in the middle of their case with no explanation,” said Immigration Defenders Legal Fund Legal Services Director Melissa Shepard. “In court, the government couldn’t even explain where he was — he had been disappeared.” 

“When the government detains and transfers people in secrecy, without transparency or access to the courts, it tears at the basic protections a democracy is supposed to guarantee,” added Shepard. “What this experience makes painfully clear is that due process and accountability cannot be optional. They are the only safeguards standing between people and the kind of lawlessness our clients suffered. We must end third country transfers, restore the asylum system, and humanitarian parole, and reinstate temporary protective status so this nightmare never happens again.” 

Continue Reading

The White House

Trump proclamation targets trans rights as State Dept. shifts visa policy

Recent policy actions from the White House limit transgender rights in sports, immigration visas, and overarching federal policy.

Published

22 hours ago

on

March 13, 2026

By

President Donald Trump stands in the Roosevelt Room in December 2025. (Washington Blade Photo by Joe Reberkenny)

In a proclamation issued by the Trump White House Thursday night, the president said he would, among other things, “restore public safety” and continue “upholding the rule of law,” while promoting policies that restrict the rights of transgender people.

“We are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written, and ensuring colleges preserve — and, where possible, expand — scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes,” the proclamation reads. “At the same time, we are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”

The statement comes amid a broader series of actions by the Trump administration targeting transgender people across multiple federal policy areas, including education, health care, and immigration. A nearly complete list of policies the current administration has put forward can be found on KFF.org.

One day before the proclamation was issued, the U.S. State Department announced changes to visa regulations that could impact transgender and gender-nonconforming people seeking entry into the United States.

The policy, published March 11 and scheduled to take effect April 10, introduces changes to the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, commonly known as the “DV Program.” The rule is framed by the department as an effort to strengthen oversight and prevent fraud within the visa lottery system, which allocates a limited number of immigrant visas annually to applicants from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States.

However, the updated language also standardizes the use of the term “sex” in federal regulations in place of “gender,” a change that LGBTQ advocates say could create additional barriers for transgender and gender-diverse applicants.

The policy states: “The Department of State (‘Department’) is amending regulations governing the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (‘DV Program’) to improve the integrity of, and combat fraud in, the program. These amendments require a petitioner to the DV Program to provide valid, unexpired passport information and to upload a scan of the biographic and signature page in the electronic entry form or otherwise indicate that he or she is exempt from this requirement. Additionally, the Department is standardizing and amending its regulations to add the word ‘shall’ to simplify guidance for consular officers; ensure the use of the term ‘sex’ in lieu of ‘gender’; and replace the term ‘age’ in the DV Program regulations with the phrase ‘date of birth’ to accurately reflect the information collected and maintained by the Department during the immigrant visa process.”

Advocates say the shift toward using “sex” rather than “gender” in federal immigration rules reflects a broader push by the administration to roll back recognition of transgender identities in federal policy.

According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, an estimated 15,000 to 50,000 undocumented transgender immigrants currently live in the United States, with many entering the country to seek refuge from persecution and hostile governments in their home countries.

Continue Reading

Ecuador

Adolescentes trans en Ecuador podrán cambiar datos en su cédula, pero con condicionamientos

Pueden modificar el campo de género en su documento de identidad con requisitos

Published

1 day ago

on

March 13, 2026

By

Edición Cientonce es el socio mediático del Washington Blade en Ecuador. Esta nota salió en su sitio web el 12 de marzo.

Por VICTOR H. CARREÑO | En una sentencia del 5 de febrero de 2026, la Corte Constitucional declaró inconstitucional el requisito legal de mayoría de edad para modificar el campo de sexo o género en la cédula de identidad y fija lineamientos para que adolescentes trans puedan cambiar estos datos.

El máximo organismo de control e interpretación constitucional incorpora dos requerimientos: que la persona adolescente se presente al procedimiento administrativo con sus padres y que informes psicosociales acrediten un grado de madurez.

El fallo resuelve una consulta de constitucionalidad de una unidad judicial que lleva una acción de protección contra el Registro Civil presentada por la familia de un adolescente trans que solicitó, en junio de 2023, modificar el campo de género en la cédula.

La institución se negó porque la Ley Orgánica de Gestión de la Identidad y Datos Civiles establece que la rectificación de sexo o género es un procedimiento para personas mayores de 18 años.

El adolescente, cuya identidad se protege en la sentencia, cuenta con el apoyo de sus padres en su transición, que inició en 2020. En una audiencia, su madre expuso que si bien en el ámbito familiar y en el sistema educativo se respeta la identidad de su hijo, fuera de estos hay situaciones, como en consultas médicas en el Seguro Social, en que debe presentar la cédula de él y quienes la reciben preguntan si es el documento equivocado.

En el desarrollo de la sentencia, la Corte expone por qué el requisito de tener mayoría de edad para acceder a la modificación de datos en la cédula es inconstitucional.

Entre varios motivos, explica que restringe los derechos al libre desarrollo de la personalidad e identidad, que la edad no puede exigirse como “criterio determinante y único” para determinar la madurez de un adolescente, y que la medida puede generar impactos negativos en el bienestar psicológico y emocional.

Por ello, indica que existen mecanismos alternativos como la evaluación individualizada, el acompañamiento técnico y la consideración del contexto familiar.

En ese sentido, la Corte dispone al Registro Civil que debe proceder al cambio de los datos de adolescentes trans cuando acudan acompañades de sus representantes legales y con el respaldo de informes psicosociales.

Estos informes, agrega la sentencia, deben ser de profesionales acreditados o de órganos técnicos públicos competentes que sean considerados por el Registro Civil.

El fallo tiene efectos para este caso y otros similares. A diferencia de otras sentencias, la Corte no ordena una reforma a la legislación.

La organización Silueta X, que difundió el caso en un comunicado el 11 de marzo, calificó el fallo como histórico y explicó que este crea jurisprudencia de cumplimiento obligatorio.

Sin embargo, otras organizaciones cuestionan los requisitos. Fundación Pakta indica que si bien la sentencia derriba la barrera etaria de la mayoría de edad, la inclusión de informes psicosociales contradice la tendencia global y regional hacia la despatologización.

Pakta menciona, por ejemplo, la Opinión Consultiva 24/17 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, instrumento que reconoce la identidad autopercebida de las personas y los derechos patrimoniales de parejas del mismo sexo.

El documento, recuerda Pakta en un comunicado, establece que para el reconocimiento de la identidad de género no se debe exigir certificados médicos ni psicológicos. Además, que la Organización Mundial de la Salud reconoció que la identidad trans no es una patología psiquiátrica.

Mientras que la activista Nua Fuentes, de Proyecto Transgénero, considera que los requisitos impuestos por la Corte pueden ser problemáticos. Menciona que frente al desconocimiento y prejuicios, profesionales de salud patologizan la identidad trans.

Además, señala que puede haber casos de que la familia y psicólogos expresen rechazo a la identidad trans y limiten los derechos de adolescentes trans. O también menciona casos de abandono de niñes y adolescentes trans y pregunta cómo reconocer su identidad si no cumplen con el requisito de acudir sin representantes legales.

Los condicionamientos para el cambio del campo de sexo o género en la cédula para adolescentes trans marcan también una diferencia con el procedimiento en personas trans de más de 18 años, pues estas —desde las reformas vigentes en 2024— no deben presentar requisitos. Solo su declaración expresa de ser una persona trans que desea que los datos de su cédula estén conformes a su identidad de género.

La madurez de niñeces y adolescencias ha sido un tema abordado en convenciones o instrumentos internacionales. La Convención sobre los Derechos del Niño de la ONU del 2009 es contundente al reconocerles como seres autónomos y capaces de formar sus propias opiniones a través de la experiencia, el entorno, las expectativas sociales y culturales.

Esta convención es mencionada en una sentencia de la Corte Constitucional en que reconoció la identidad de infancias y adolescencias trans en el sistema educativo.

En las Observaciones Generales del Comité de los Derechos del Niño, documentos de interpretación para los alcances de la mencionada Convención, se explica que la madurez es “la capacidad de comprender y evaluar las consecuencias de un asunto determinado”, lo cual debe considerarse en relación con su capacidad individual, contextos, entornos, experiencias de vida y familiar, desarrollo psicológico y no únicamente con su edad biológica.

Además, que la edad cronológica no determina la evolución de las capacidades de las niñeces y adolescencias porque estas crecen a lo largo del tiempo.

Continue Reading

Popular