This post on the blog In This Moment looks at some of the consequences of gay marriage bans in various states:
When we fought the Kansas ban on same sex marriage in 2005, I was struck by how vigorously our opponents claimed that the ban would never hurt a soul.
Over and over again, they assured voters that voting "yes" on the constitutional amendment would only ban something that was already illegal. In the end, Kansas voters gave in and approved the ban.
Meanwhile, with every passing day there is new evidence that everything the religious right said about these amendments was a lie. People are being hurt. Both gays and straights are losing health insurance and other employment benefits. Some are even losing the right to prosecute abusers for beating them up, and that's just the start.
What I have never understood is how it helps this nation to keep LGBT citizens from getting jobs and having health insurance. What does the religious right think it gets by hurting lesbian and gay families and their children?
I don't know if those questions can be answered. Perhaps, like many voters in Kansas, people just aren't thinking. Perhaps they don't understand the consequences of their votes, or perhaps, as John Aravosis says over at AMERICAblog: "The religious right pretty much wants us dead."
I know some like Fred Phelps do believe that all gays should be put to death. On the other hand, I know that many other honest Americans don't. I think it's time for folks to wake up and understand what their votes are doing. It's time to stop believing the lies of the religious right.
In this post, it is clear that, at least in some states, gay marriage bans have a broader reach and affect any non-married couple. Sadly, some on the religious right don't care who gets hurt as long as their interpretation of the Bible, or perhaps just their own thurst for power, is satisfied.
June 07, 2007
Does Jesus Love Transgender People?
This article by Joanne Herman in the Advocate resoundingly concludes that yes, he would, despite what most fundamentalists would have people believe.
Herman does an excellent job in illustrating two key points about misusing the Bible; 1) focusing on one or two scripture verses that, taken out of context, contradict the message of God's love and 2) picking and choosing what scripture to take literally.
Herman points out how Deuteronomy 22:5 and 23:1 are used to condemn transgender people--very isolated references that are not as black and white as many people choose to interpret them. At the same time, she points out, people focus on scriptures like that and the clobber passages while ignoring the laws of the time written right along with them that would, for example, condemn a person to death for working on the Sabbath and prohibit the eating of shellfish.
Could the Bible include any positive references to transgender people?
Meanwhile, biologist Joan Roughgarden has noted that the Bible actually provides evidence that transgender people were a part of regular life even in biblical times. Roughgarden is a transgender woman who has taught at Stanford University since 1972. In her book Evolution's Rainbow, Roughgarden wondered why, if Darwin’s theory of evolution were correct, diversity in the animal population did not seem to be disappearing.
But Roughgarden is also a Christian who has done extensive reading of the Bible. In her latest work, Evolution and Christian Faith, she offers the radical notion that the two beliefs are actually quite compatible. And she goes a step further to claim that Jesus’ beliefs and teachings actually were intended to help Christians live with the diversity that existed then and that would continue to be present.
Of relevance to trans people is her discussion of eunuchs. She references Matthew 19:12, in which Jesus describes three types of eunuchs—those “which were so born from their mothers’ womb,” those “which were made eunuchs of men,” and those “which made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
Roughgarden interprets the first category as describing intersex individuals and the latter transsexual individuals. She notes that Jesus’ descriptions line up with those of ancient Roman writers who described those we would today call cross-dressers as well as those who transitioned genders without physical alteration.
She points out that some eunuchs held powerful positions and that “eunuchs were common enough that writers referred to them with such phrases as ‘armies of eunuchs.’” And she asserts that the apostle Philip's baptism of the eunuch in Acts 9:27–38 serves as an “explicit instruction to include eunuchs within the church.”
Newman closes with a critically important point:
Many LGBT people have been hurt by religion used in hate, and transgender people are no exception. I nervously returned to church only when my wife, Barbara, was dying of cancer and I needed a spiritual connection during those difficult days. What I discovered was that there are progressive mainline churches that truly welcome LGBT folks, and their leaders are convinced that Jesus would (and did) too.
So don’t hesitate to question sweeping generalizations about Jesus. And if you are a Christian, please do your own research.
Don't take my word for it either. Hopefully what you read here and other welcoming and affirming resources leads you to consider these points, do your own study, and work out with God through the Holy Spirit what is right and who he accepts.
I'm confident you'll find a lot more of the new covenant Jesus established and a lot less of the Old Testament judgementalism that fundamentalists work so hard to hang on to.
Herman does an excellent job in illustrating two key points about misusing the Bible; 1) focusing on one or two scripture verses that, taken out of context, contradict the message of God's love and 2) picking and choosing what scripture to take literally.
Herman points out how Deuteronomy 22:5 and 23:1 are used to condemn transgender people--very isolated references that are not as black and white as many people choose to interpret them. At the same time, she points out, people focus on scriptures like that and the clobber passages while ignoring the laws of the time written right along with them that would, for example, condemn a person to death for working on the Sabbath and prohibit the eating of shellfish.
Could the Bible include any positive references to transgender people?
Meanwhile, biologist Joan Roughgarden has noted that the Bible actually provides evidence that transgender people were a part of regular life even in biblical times. Roughgarden is a transgender woman who has taught at Stanford University since 1972. In her book Evolution's Rainbow, Roughgarden wondered why, if Darwin’s theory of evolution were correct, diversity in the animal population did not seem to be disappearing.
But Roughgarden is also a Christian who has done extensive reading of the Bible. In her latest work, Evolution and Christian Faith, she offers the radical notion that the two beliefs are actually quite compatible. And she goes a step further to claim that Jesus’ beliefs and teachings actually were intended to help Christians live with the diversity that existed then and that would continue to be present.
Of relevance to trans people is her discussion of eunuchs. She references Matthew 19:12, in which Jesus describes three types of eunuchs—those “which were so born from their mothers’ womb,” those “which were made eunuchs of men,” and those “which made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
Roughgarden interprets the first category as describing intersex individuals and the latter transsexual individuals. She notes that Jesus’ descriptions line up with those of ancient Roman writers who described those we would today call cross-dressers as well as those who transitioned genders without physical alteration.
She points out that some eunuchs held powerful positions and that “eunuchs were common enough that writers referred to them with such phrases as ‘armies of eunuchs.’” And she asserts that the apostle Philip's baptism of the eunuch in Acts 9:27–38 serves as an “explicit instruction to include eunuchs within the church.”
Newman closes with a critically important point:
Many LGBT people have been hurt by religion used in hate, and transgender people are no exception. I nervously returned to church only when my wife, Barbara, was dying of cancer and I needed a spiritual connection during those difficult days. What I discovered was that there are progressive mainline churches that truly welcome LGBT folks, and their leaders are convinced that Jesus would (and did) too.
So don’t hesitate to question sweeping generalizations about Jesus. And if you are a Christian, please do your own research.
Don't take my word for it either. Hopefully what you read here and other welcoming and affirming resources leads you to consider these points, do your own study, and work out with God through the Holy Spirit what is right and who he accepts.
I'm confident you'll find a lot more of the new covenant Jesus established and a lot less of the Old Testament judgementalism that fundamentalists work so hard to hang on to.
June 06, 2007
The Evolution of Marriage Laws
June 12 is the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court's unanimous decision in the Loving vs. Virginia case that struck down bans on interracial marriages. The law that was struck down was Virginia's "Racial Integrity Act." Sound a lot like today's marriage protection acts? That's the point of this op-ed piece in the Washington Post.
Interracial marriage bans now seem obviously invidious. But go back far enough and the consensus flips. At one point, most everyone thought such bans were legitimate. The same is true of segregated schooling and discrimination against women. It is true of just about everything the Supreme Court has held that the equal protection clause prohibits: At one point, all of these practices were seen as legitimate reflections of the world, not as invidious attempts to impose inequality. When the court held these practices unconstitutional, it was neither enforcing a rule that had existed since 1868 nor creating a new rule. It was recognizing that social attitudes had shifted, and with them the understanding about what is reasonable and what is invidious.
This point connects Loving to current social struggles, most notably the debate over same-sex marriage. Opponents decry the "activist judges" in Massachusetts who struck down that state's same-sex marriage ban and warn that the Supreme Court will someday follow. So it may -- but, if it does, responsibility will not lie primarily with judges.
The past few decades have brought a dramatic change in social attitudes about homosexuality. The American Psychiatric Association, which once classified homosexuality as a mental disease, abandoned that position in 1973. Public opinion polls show an increasing acceptance of homosexuality, and state legislatures are beginning to follow. Restricting the benefits of marriage to opposite-sex couples is increasingly seen as invidious, an inequality inflicted for no good reason.
If the trend continues, this view eventually will find expression at the Supreme Court level, just as it did in Loving. This is not judicial activism. It is how we make the Constitution ours.
The writer of this piece, Kermit Roosevelt, is author of the book "The Myth of Judicial Activism," which is the phrase right-wingers use to describe rulings they don't like, so he's done his homework.
I saw a piece from Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council where he writes that, of course, interracial marriage is fine because it still involves a man and a woman but same-sex marriage is against God's plan. It is obvious, though, that 40 years ago there were Tony Perkins types arguing that interracial marriage was also a violation of God's will. Fortunately over time people grew to learn that was wrong, just as it appears will happen for same-sex unions.
Interracial marriage bans now seem obviously invidious. But go back far enough and the consensus flips. At one point, most everyone thought such bans were legitimate. The same is true of segregated schooling and discrimination against women. It is true of just about everything the Supreme Court has held that the equal protection clause prohibits: At one point, all of these practices were seen as legitimate reflections of the world, not as invidious attempts to impose inequality. When the court held these practices unconstitutional, it was neither enforcing a rule that had existed since 1868 nor creating a new rule. It was recognizing that social attitudes had shifted, and with them the understanding about what is reasonable and what is invidious.
This point connects Loving to current social struggles, most notably the debate over same-sex marriage. Opponents decry the "activist judges" in Massachusetts who struck down that state's same-sex marriage ban and warn that the Supreme Court will someday follow. So it may -- but, if it does, responsibility will not lie primarily with judges.
The past few decades have brought a dramatic change in social attitudes about homosexuality. The American Psychiatric Association, which once classified homosexuality as a mental disease, abandoned that position in 1973. Public opinion polls show an increasing acceptance of homosexuality, and state legislatures are beginning to follow. Restricting the benefits of marriage to opposite-sex couples is increasingly seen as invidious, an inequality inflicted for no good reason.
If the trend continues, this view eventually will find expression at the Supreme Court level, just as it did in Loving. This is not judicial activism. It is how we make the Constitution ours.
The writer of this piece, Kermit Roosevelt, is author of the book "The Myth of Judicial Activism," which is the phrase right-wingers use to describe rulings they don't like, so he's done his homework.
I saw a piece from Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council where he writes that, of course, interracial marriage is fine because it still involves a man and a woman but same-sex marriage is against God's plan. It is obvious, though, that 40 years ago there were Tony Perkins types arguing that interracial marriage was also a violation of God's will. Fortunately over time people grew to learn that was wrong, just as it appears will happen for same-sex unions.
June 05, 2007
Democratic Presidential Candidates All Oppose "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
This article from The Advocate spells out in some detail the views of the eight announced Democratic presidential candidates regarding the existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, but the bottom line is that they are came out against it during Sunday's debate.
In Tuesday night's Republican debate, all ten candidates supported "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
Pretty easy to draw a line there, isn't it?
In Tuesday night's Republican debate, all ten candidates supported "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
Pretty easy to draw a line there, isn't it?
Much More on Gay Republicans
I ran across this story which is a good follow-up to a story I posted on Sunday where I questioned how a GLBT person could be a member of the Republican party. I appreciated the conversation that resulted, but here is a lengthy research piece posted on the website of Political Research Associates.
The article focuses on the Log Cabin Republicans, which it reports has about 20,000 members, and some of the best known gay conservatives like Andrew Sullivan. Here are a couple of the points I found particularly interesting:
Among the cadre of gay conservative writers, people of color are also conspicuously absent. This makes sense if we realize that issues like affirmative action, racism, and public education are mostly off the radar of gay right pundits. While gay conservative people of color certainly do exist, their relationship with the gay movement has been problematical, and no one has emerged to represent them nor has anyone been sustained by the usual media.
The power of gay conservative pundits has successfully focused LGBT issues on the narrow frame of gay marriage. This has effectively erased from their line of vision those LGBT people who do not stand to receive its benefits, those not in the solid middle class, poor single parents, and the uninsured.
In 2007, the gay agenda that so worries the Christian Right as a radical remaking of society amounts to the single issue of gay rights, manifest in a primary demand of gay marriage and the remnants of interest in non-discrimination of gays in the military. While gay conservatives may not have consciously engineered this single issue focus, their increasing visibility in the cause during a period of conservative resurgence reinforces the narrow scope of contemporary gay politics.
Strikingly, these narrow goals can be seen as conservative, or non-radical demands - to be allowed to defend national security and to be recognized as identical to heterosexuals under the law. This toes the line of the gay conservative position as does the reality that the gay movement, despite its political diversity, has embraced same sex marriage as its central political demand. Whether done consciously or not, this choice allows some, including parts of the Right, to separate the LGBT community into "good gays," those who just want to get married and settle down, and "bad gays," those who flaunt their sexuality, demand radical change, or challenge gender-normative images. This, riding on the demise of a functioning radical gay left, represents the true influence of gay conservatism on the politics of homosexuality: the gay movement continues to be pulled to the right.
While I believe the extreme left among gay political activists have been effectively marginalized, I personally don't find that the "gay movement" is drifting to the right. I welcome your opinions on that point.
The article focuses on the Log Cabin Republicans, which it reports has about 20,000 members, and some of the best known gay conservatives like Andrew Sullivan. Here are a couple of the points I found particularly interesting:
Among the cadre of gay conservative writers, people of color are also conspicuously absent. This makes sense if we realize that issues like affirmative action, racism, and public education are mostly off the radar of gay right pundits. While gay conservative people of color certainly do exist, their relationship with the gay movement has been problematical, and no one has emerged to represent them nor has anyone been sustained by the usual media.
The power of gay conservative pundits has successfully focused LGBT issues on the narrow frame of gay marriage. This has effectively erased from their line of vision those LGBT people who do not stand to receive its benefits, those not in the solid middle class, poor single parents, and the uninsured.
In 2007, the gay agenda that so worries the Christian Right as a radical remaking of society amounts to the single issue of gay rights, manifest in a primary demand of gay marriage and the remnants of interest in non-discrimination of gays in the military. While gay conservatives may not have consciously engineered this single issue focus, their increasing visibility in the cause during a period of conservative resurgence reinforces the narrow scope of contemporary gay politics.
Strikingly, these narrow goals can be seen as conservative, or non-radical demands - to be allowed to defend national security and to be recognized as identical to heterosexuals under the law. This toes the line of the gay conservative position as does the reality that the gay movement, despite its political diversity, has embraced same sex marriage as its central political demand. Whether done consciously or not, this choice allows some, including parts of the Right, to separate the LGBT community into "good gays," those who just want to get married and settle down, and "bad gays," those who flaunt their sexuality, demand radical change, or challenge gender-normative images. This, riding on the demise of a functioning radical gay left, represents the true influence of gay conservatism on the politics of homosexuality: the gay movement continues to be pulled to the right.
While I believe the extreme left among gay political activists have been effectively marginalized, I personally don't find that the "gay movement" is drifting to the right. I welcome your opinions on that point.
Worlds Don't Have to Collide, They Can Hopefully Coexist
That's the hope for this coming weekend in Binghamton, NY, where a evangelical festival led by Franklin Graham will be held near a gay pride fair. Leaders of both events have openly invited people attending the other one to come to theirs, and there does seem to be a spirit of at least peaceful co-existence if not cooperation. Hopefully that will come to pass.
From the Christian Post:
Tens of thousands of people are expected to hear the message of sin and salvation at an evangelistic festival in Binghamton, N.Y., this weekend. Also coming to town that same weekend is a gay pride fair.
The NYPENN Franklin Graham Festival will hit Binghamton this Friday for a three-day event complete with popular Christian music artists, KidzFest and free admission. It's the first time a Graham festival is landing in the Southern Tier and local organizers are readying two additional overflow venues at the Binghamton University Events Center.
With praying and preparation months into the event, John O'Neil, chairman of the event's executive committee of local volunteers, says the festival is to "reach the un-churched, to provide a message of love, a message of hope, a message of meaning," according to the local Press & Sun-Bulletin.
And one group of people that organizers have extended the festival invitation to is the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community (LGBT). June is “gay pride” month and members of the Binghamton Pride Coalition have a series of events planned for the entire month, including its third annual Pride Fair celebrating the LGBT community on Saturday.
"I'd like to invite them to come to our meeting. I think everyone, no matter what your preferences, can certainly find hope in the message of the Gospel," Art Bailey, director of the Graham festival, told the local newspaper. "People of all persuasions want you to look at everything with an open mind. I think we'd say the same thing."
As Binghamton prepares to welcome Graham to the city for the June 8-10 festival, the city's mayor has already raised the gay flag and shown his support to the LGBT community.
On June 1, Mayor Matthew T. Ryan and members of the Binghamton Pride Coalition kicked off the month with a proclamation, calling it a month to celebrate community diversity and to raise awareness of LGBT issues. Ryan also issued an executive order recognizing same-sex "marriages" in the city. The City of Binghamton now joins Ithaca, Rochester, Albany and Nyack in recognizing same-sex "marriages" legally performed in other states and jurisdictions.
Some students and faculty at Binghamton University protested an evangelistic festival being held on school grounds, claiming the event contradicts the Student Handbook's provision against bias-related activities, as well as a disregard for diversity, according to Press & Sun-Bulletin.
Protestors were rebuffed as the school's administration confirmed that Graham's organizers met all the conditions for rental of the Events Center.
Claudia Stallman of Binghamton, who directs the Lesbian and Gay Family Building project, told the local newspaper that the LGBT community has no plans to disrupt the Graham festival and hopes people who attend the evangelistic event do not disrupt their celebration.
Meanwhile, organizers have high expectations for the Franklin Graham festival and hundreds have been praying for its success.
"It's something that's going to transform this community forever," said O'Neil.
From the Christian Post:
Tens of thousands of people are expected to hear the message of sin and salvation at an evangelistic festival in Binghamton, N.Y., this weekend. Also coming to town that same weekend is a gay pride fair.
The NYPENN Franklin Graham Festival will hit Binghamton this Friday for a three-day event complete with popular Christian music artists, KidzFest and free admission. It's the first time a Graham festival is landing in the Southern Tier and local organizers are readying two additional overflow venues at the Binghamton University Events Center.
With praying and preparation months into the event, John O'Neil, chairman of the event's executive committee of local volunteers, says the festival is to "reach the un-churched, to provide a message of love, a message of hope, a message of meaning," according to the local Press & Sun-Bulletin.
And one group of people that organizers have extended the festival invitation to is the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community (LGBT). June is “gay pride” month and members of the Binghamton Pride Coalition have a series of events planned for the entire month, including its third annual Pride Fair celebrating the LGBT community on Saturday.
"I'd like to invite them to come to our meeting. I think everyone, no matter what your preferences, can certainly find hope in the message of the Gospel," Art Bailey, director of the Graham festival, told the local newspaper. "People of all persuasions want you to look at everything with an open mind. I think we'd say the same thing."
As Binghamton prepares to welcome Graham to the city for the June 8-10 festival, the city's mayor has already raised the gay flag and shown his support to the LGBT community.
On June 1, Mayor Matthew T. Ryan and members of the Binghamton Pride Coalition kicked off the month with a proclamation, calling it a month to celebrate community diversity and to raise awareness of LGBT issues. Ryan also issued an executive order recognizing same-sex "marriages" in the city. The City of Binghamton now joins Ithaca, Rochester, Albany and Nyack in recognizing same-sex "marriages" legally performed in other states and jurisdictions.
Some students and faculty at Binghamton University protested an evangelistic festival being held on school grounds, claiming the event contradicts the Student Handbook's provision against bias-related activities, as well as a disregard for diversity, according to Press & Sun-Bulletin.
Protestors were rebuffed as the school's administration confirmed that Graham's organizers met all the conditions for rental of the Events Center.
Claudia Stallman of Binghamton, who directs the Lesbian and Gay Family Building project, told the local newspaper that the LGBT community has no plans to disrupt the Graham festival and hopes people who attend the evangelistic event do not disrupt their celebration.
Meanwhile, organizers have high expectations for the Franklin Graham festival and hundreds have been praying for its success.
"It's something that's going to transform this community forever," said O'Neil.
Understanding God's Perfect Love for GLBT People
One of the things I've learned during the last two years of writing this blog is how difficult it is for so many GLBT people to find a path to God that does not require them to forsake their sexual identity for the guise of a heterosexual or a life of celibacy.
This post on Ex-Gay Watch by Eugene Wagner does as good a job of explaining it as any essay I have run across:
Every time I recount the story of how I transitioned from a place of unquestioning acceptance of ex-gay ideology into the journey that I find myself on today, it comes out a bit differently as I focus on different aspects of what was, at the time, a far more complex process than a few pages of text could ever fully capture. If there’s one pivotal event that I hope I adequately account for in every retelling, it’s how I came to truly understand, for the first time, that God loves me exactly the way I am, and that I don’t have to change who or what I am to earn his acceptance
Words cannot fully convey just how revolutionary it was to come to the realization that not only did I not have to become somebody else in order to appease God, but he didn’t want me to be somebody else. Yet somebody else was precisely what I was trying to become through my efforts to “reclaim my natural heterosexuality.”
In practice, the lessons drummed into me in church every Sunday led me to a life of fear - fear of what God would do to my worthless self if I didn’t say and do all the right things, fear of what God will do to those I love if I can’t persuade them to adopt my beliefs and standards, and fear of the terrible judgment God will pour out on our nation if his followers can’t bring enough of our neighbors to repentance.
But if “perfect love drives out fear,” as we’re told in 1 John 4:18, then something must be amiss in our churches. If fear is ever our motivation for doing anything, then perhaps it’s time for us to stop and reexamine what we really believe, underneath what we claim to believe.
Fortunately, Eugene came out of this struggle at peace with himself and with God's love for him as a homosexual child of God.
That path, although difficult and often painful, is available to any and all GLBT people who seek it. It is worth the effort.
This post on Ex-Gay Watch by Eugene Wagner does as good a job of explaining it as any essay I have run across:
Every time I recount the story of how I transitioned from a place of unquestioning acceptance of ex-gay ideology into the journey that I find myself on today, it comes out a bit differently as I focus on different aspects of what was, at the time, a far more complex process than a few pages of text could ever fully capture. If there’s one pivotal event that I hope I adequately account for in every retelling, it’s how I came to truly understand, for the first time, that God loves me exactly the way I am, and that I don’t have to change who or what I am to earn his acceptance
Words cannot fully convey just how revolutionary it was to come to the realization that not only did I not have to become somebody else in order to appease God, but he didn’t want me to be somebody else. Yet somebody else was precisely what I was trying to become through my efforts to “reclaim my natural heterosexuality.”
In practice, the lessons drummed into me in church every Sunday led me to a life of fear - fear of what God would do to my worthless self if I didn’t say and do all the right things, fear of what God will do to those I love if I can’t persuade them to adopt my beliefs and standards, and fear of the terrible judgment God will pour out on our nation if his followers can’t bring enough of our neighbors to repentance.
But if “perfect love drives out fear,” as we’re told in 1 John 4:18, then something must be amiss in our churches. If fear is ever our motivation for doing anything, then perhaps it’s time for us to stop and reexamine what we really believe, underneath what we claim to believe.
Fortunately, Eugene came out of this struggle at peace with himself and with God's love for him as a homosexual child of God.
That path, although difficult and often painful, is available to any and all GLBT people who seek it. It is worth the effort.
June 04, 2007
International Carnival of Pozitives Issue 12
We are ALL living with HIV/AIDS. This is a carnival about living with HIV/AIDS and how HIV/AIDS has affected your life. This site assumes that HIV/AIDS is caused by a variety of HIV viruses, either wild strains or those generated from drug resistance, and is not a forum for those who do not believe that HIV causes AIDS. Your stories of life with HIV/AIDS, including your survival strategies, your medication issues, your friends or loved ones with HIV/AIDS, your efforts for the cause, in fact, anything to do with how you live positively will be accepted.
That's the call for contributions for the International Carnival of Pozitives, which has just published its 12th issue. Here's the link, and I always highly recommend these moving stories of focusing of the positives in a life touched by the HIV/AIDS virus.
That's the call for contributions for the International Carnival of Pozitives, which has just published its 12th issue. Here's the link, and I always highly recommend these moving stories of focusing of the positives in a life touched by the HIV/AIDS virus.
Exxon Adds Insult to Injury
With gas prices well over $3.00 a gallon across the United States, it's easy to hate on the big oil companies, especially while they are recording record profits. Unfortunately, Exxon is piling on by the way they continue to show disrepect towards GLBT people.
This from the Human Rights Campaign:
ExxonMobil shareholders voted today with record support for a resolution to add “sexual orientation” to the company’s written equal employment opportunity policy. The percentage of shares voted in favor of the proposal has grown each of the last eight years, with 37.8 percent of shares voting in favor of the policy this year, an increase from 34.6 percent in 2005. The tally represents about 1.78 billion total shares voted in favor of the proposal.
“ExxonMobil continues to have the dubious distinction of being the only Fortune 50 company that refuses to add sexual orientation to their non-discrimination policy,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “With a record number of shareholders voting in favor of equal protections and siding with the overwhelming majority of Americans supporting the right of all employees to earn a living free of discrimination, it is irresponsible for ExxonMobil not to join the majority of companies that provide equal protections and benefits to all families.”
ExxonMobil is alone as the only Fortune 50 company that refuses to write sexual orientation protections into its primary non-discrimination policy. A total of 435 — nearly 90 percent — of Fortune 500 companies include sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies and 124 — or 25 percent — include gender identity. ExxonMobil’s competitors, BP Corp., Chevron Corp., Dow Chemical and DuPont all have non-discrimination statements inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity. Moreover, ExxonMobil does not provide domestic partner health insurance to all of its employees.
Solmonese continued, “In 2006, for the first time, a majority of the Fortune 500 — a total of 266, or 53 percent — offered domestic partner benefits. While most of corporate America recognizes and respects the diversity of their workforce, ExxonMobil continues to resist the most basic protections that should be afforded to all Americans.”
The Human Rights Campaign was on hand at the annual shareholder meeting in Dallas to present the resolution. A group of 21 organizations, including HRC, make up the Coalition to Promote Equality at ExxonMobil.
Mobil Corp. offered such written protection, and domestic partner benefits, to its employees; however, upon its 1999 merger with Exxon, the basic non-discrimination protection was removed and the domestic partner benefits program closed to new employees. Twenty-four members of Congress, and thousands of stockholders and consumers, wrote to ExxonMobil Chairman Lee R. Raymond in December 1999 to protest the policy reversals. In January 2000, stockholders and activists protested at a company facility in Houston, causing the facility to close for the day.
I hope you keep this in mind the next time you select where to buy gas.
This from the Human Rights Campaign:
ExxonMobil shareholders voted today with record support for a resolution to add “sexual orientation” to the company’s written equal employment opportunity policy. The percentage of shares voted in favor of the proposal has grown each of the last eight years, with 37.8 percent of shares voting in favor of the policy this year, an increase from 34.6 percent in 2005. The tally represents about 1.78 billion total shares voted in favor of the proposal.
“ExxonMobil continues to have the dubious distinction of being the only Fortune 50 company that refuses to add sexual orientation to their non-discrimination policy,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “With a record number of shareholders voting in favor of equal protections and siding with the overwhelming majority of Americans supporting the right of all employees to earn a living free of discrimination, it is irresponsible for ExxonMobil not to join the majority of companies that provide equal protections and benefits to all families.”
ExxonMobil is alone as the only Fortune 50 company that refuses to write sexual orientation protections into its primary non-discrimination policy. A total of 435 — nearly 90 percent — of Fortune 500 companies include sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies and 124 — or 25 percent — include gender identity. ExxonMobil’s competitors, BP Corp., Chevron Corp., Dow Chemical and DuPont all have non-discrimination statements inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity. Moreover, ExxonMobil does not provide domestic partner health insurance to all of its employees.
Solmonese continued, “In 2006, for the first time, a majority of the Fortune 500 — a total of 266, or 53 percent — offered domestic partner benefits. While most of corporate America recognizes and respects the diversity of their workforce, ExxonMobil continues to resist the most basic protections that should be afforded to all Americans.”
The Human Rights Campaign was on hand at the annual shareholder meeting in Dallas to present the resolution. A group of 21 organizations, including HRC, make up the Coalition to Promote Equality at ExxonMobil.
Mobil Corp. offered such written protection, and domestic partner benefits, to its employees; however, upon its 1999 merger with Exxon, the basic non-discrimination protection was removed and the domestic partner benefits program closed to new employees. Twenty-four members of Congress, and thousands of stockholders and consumers, wrote to ExxonMobil Chairman Lee R. Raymond in December 1999 to protest the policy reversals. In January 2000, stockholders and activists protested at a company facility in Houston, causing the facility to close for the day.
I hope you keep this in mind the next time you select where to buy gas.
June 03, 2007
Mike Rogers Cleans Out Closets on Capitol Hill
From Yahoo News:
Mike Rogers, who writes the blogs Blogactive.com and PageOneQ (where I found this link), is fighting back against anti-gay politicians when he finds evidence that they are actually closeted homosexuals.
He outs them.
Rogers is a muckraking gay blogger who uses his insider's knowledge of Washington politics and broad blanket of contacts to "out" gay politicos — but only, he says, if they are undermining gay rights. Critics call his tactics divisive and politically motivated.
Rogers, a longtime gay activist, started blogactive.com in 2004, using it to yank out of the closet at least two dozen high-ranking political figures, including senators, congressmen and Bush administration officials.
He's outed so many closeted gay politicos, he's starting to make Capitol Hill look like Brokeback Mountain. All of them, he says, use their positions to actively oppose the equal rights of gay citizens while at the same time, secretly live a gay life.
People have called Rogers a gay terrorist, but he says, "The only people who say things like that are people who have a vested interest in protecting the closet."
"I feel more sad for [the people I out] than anger," Rogers says. "... That they are in this position, that they are self-loathing, willing to wake up everyday and go to work against the very community they are a member of is quite shocking.
"Many gay organizations are troubled by outing but stop short of condemning it. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation "doesn't encourage outing, period," says GLAAD's Rashad Robinson. "But there is an argument that can be made — and many make it — for holding closeted political figures who attack and exploit gay people and our families for political gain accountable for their actions.
"However, the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay Republican group, disagree. "Log Cabin is strongly against outing," says its president, Patrick Sammon. "It is unproductive and motivated by vengeance. It does nothing to further the cause of equality for gay and lesbian Americans."
I think the response by the Log Cabin Republicans (I still don't understand how a self-respecting GLBT person can be a Republican given that party's hostility toward the community) is really sad. I applaud Rogers' activities. Of course they are politically motivated, just like the actions of those who work hard to deny rights to GLBT people. I think exposing closeted, self-loathing politicans who work as enemies of gay rights need to be flushed out into an honest public debate outside of their closets.
Honesty and truth in politics--it's a radical idea but it just might work.
Mike Rogers, who writes the blogs Blogactive.com and PageOneQ (where I found this link), is fighting back against anti-gay politicians when he finds evidence that they are actually closeted homosexuals.
He outs them.
Rogers is a muckraking gay blogger who uses his insider's knowledge of Washington politics and broad blanket of contacts to "out" gay politicos — but only, he says, if they are undermining gay rights. Critics call his tactics divisive and politically motivated.
Rogers, a longtime gay activist, started blogactive.com in 2004, using it to yank out of the closet at least two dozen high-ranking political figures, including senators, congressmen and Bush administration officials.
He's outed so many closeted gay politicos, he's starting to make Capitol Hill look like Brokeback Mountain. All of them, he says, use their positions to actively oppose the equal rights of gay citizens while at the same time, secretly live a gay life.
People have called Rogers a gay terrorist, but he says, "The only people who say things like that are people who have a vested interest in protecting the closet."
"I feel more sad for [the people I out] than anger," Rogers says. "... That they are in this position, that they are self-loathing, willing to wake up everyday and go to work against the very community they are a member of is quite shocking.
"Many gay organizations are troubled by outing but stop short of condemning it. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation "doesn't encourage outing, period," says GLAAD's Rashad Robinson. "But there is an argument that can be made — and many make it — for holding closeted political figures who attack and exploit gay people and our families for political gain accountable for their actions.
"However, the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay Republican group, disagree. "Log Cabin is strongly against outing," says its president, Patrick Sammon. "It is unproductive and motivated by vengeance. It does nothing to further the cause of equality for gay and lesbian Americans."
I think the response by the Log Cabin Republicans (I still don't understand how a self-respecting GLBT person can be a Republican given that party's hostility toward the community) is really sad. I applaud Rogers' activities. Of course they are politically motivated, just like the actions of those who work hard to deny rights to GLBT people. I think exposing closeted, self-loathing politicans who work as enemies of gay rights need to be flushed out into an honest public debate outside of their closets.
Honesty and truth in politics--it's a radical idea but it just might work.
2nd Annual Blogging for GLBT Familes
Mombian.com hosted the second annual "Blogging for GLBT Families," which just wrapped up yesterday. I was happy to contribute last year and, although I did not directly participate this time there are still some wonderful posts that are worth your time to read. At last count there are over 130 different posts collected for this event so try to block out some time and check out as many as you can.
Here's the link to the 2nd annual "Blogging for GLBT Families."
Here's the link to the 2nd annual "Blogging for GLBT Families."
June 02, 2007
More Examples of Religion and Politics Mixing--Poorly
Two items came to my e-mail over the last couple of days that reminded me how the intertwining of politics and religion is often to the detriment of both.
First, this item from Americans United for Separation of Church and State:
Americans United asserts that Bill Keller Ministries seems to have violated federal tax law when its online division, Liveprayer.com, ran articles warning readers that a vote for Romney is a vote for Satan.
“If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for satan!” asserted the ministry in the May 11 “devotional” posted on Liveprayer.com. “This message today is not about Mitt Romney. Romney is an unashamed and proud member of the Mormon cult founded by a murdering polygamist pedophile named Joseph Smith nearly 200 years ago. The teachings of the Mormon cult are doctrinally and theologically in complete opposition to the Absolute Truth of God’s Word….This message is about the top Christian leaders in our nation who are supporting this cult members [sic] quest to become the next President of the United States.”
Keller apparently saw this report, writing this under the heading of devotional (what?!) dated June 2:
A real tool of satan, Barry Lynn who runs a group called the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, has called on the IRS to investigate Liveprayer for my comments about Mitt Romney. Since I highly doubt Lynn even knows who I am, it would be interesting to know if it was the Mormons who put him up to this.
Nice. Another reminder that when someone uses the phrase "Absolute Truth of God's Word" or anything akin to that they usually mean "The Truth According to Me Using Scripture to Justify It." These folks generally don't take criticism very well either. For what it's worth, I LOVE Rev. Lynn. I have seen him speak several times on television and have a great respect for his views and the effectiveness with which he presents them.
Personally, I don't think there's much chance I would vote for Mitt Romney for President, but it has nothing to do with the fact that he's a mormon. I'm not voting for Chief Pastor, I'm voting for Chief Executive. I wish anyone who makes a decision whether or not to vote for a political candidate based on their faith and not their political record and views could have their vote taken away from them.
Then this disturbing notice arrived in my e-mail from Wayne Besen's advocacy organization, Truth Wins Out:
Truth Wins Out announced its strong and committed opposition today to President George W. Bush’s nomination for U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. James W. Holsinger, after it was revealed that he started a church in Lexington, Kentucky that has a ministry to “cure” gay people.
“Holsinger is an ideologue whose medical views on gay and lesbian people resemble sorcery more than sound science,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “The last thing America needed was another deplorable nominee who isn’t up to the job, but this is exactly what Bush delivered.”
Holsinger’s nomination will go before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, chaired by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) Presidential candidates Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Christopher Dodd (D-CT) sit on this committee.
I'm way past the "you must be freakin' kidding me" reactions when Bush pulls something like this, jabbing a sharp stick in the eye of the GLBT and scientific communities yet again.
What I find particularly interesting here is the makeup of the Senate committee that will vote on this nomination. Senators Obama and Clinton have been making some ovetures to the GLBT community fishing for votes, but now it's their votes that will speak volumes about how much support they will actually give the gay and lesbian people they want to support them.
First, this item from Americans United for Separation of Church and State:
Americans United asserts that Bill Keller Ministries seems to have violated federal tax law when its online division, Liveprayer.com, ran articles warning readers that a vote for Romney is a vote for Satan.
“If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for satan!” asserted the ministry in the May 11 “devotional” posted on Liveprayer.com. “This message today is not about Mitt Romney. Romney is an unashamed and proud member of the Mormon cult founded by a murdering polygamist pedophile named Joseph Smith nearly 200 years ago. The teachings of the Mormon cult are doctrinally and theologically in complete opposition to the Absolute Truth of God’s Word….This message is about the top Christian leaders in our nation who are supporting this cult members [sic] quest to become the next President of the United States.”
Keller apparently saw this report, writing this under the heading of devotional (what?!) dated June 2:
A real tool of satan, Barry Lynn who runs a group called the Americans United for Separation of Church and State, has called on the IRS to investigate Liveprayer for my comments about Mitt Romney. Since I highly doubt Lynn even knows who I am, it would be interesting to know if it was the Mormons who put him up to this.
Nice. Another reminder that when someone uses the phrase "Absolute Truth of God's Word" or anything akin to that they usually mean "The Truth According to Me Using Scripture to Justify It." These folks generally don't take criticism very well either. For what it's worth, I LOVE Rev. Lynn. I have seen him speak several times on television and have a great respect for his views and the effectiveness with which he presents them.
Personally, I don't think there's much chance I would vote for Mitt Romney for President, but it has nothing to do with the fact that he's a mormon. I'm not voting for Chief Pastor, I'm voting for Chief Executive. I wish anyone who makes a decision whether or not to vote for a political candidate based on their faith and not their political record and views could have their vote taken away from them.
Then this disturbing notice arrived in my e-mail from Wayne Besen's advocacy organization, Truth Wins Out:
Truth Wins Out announced its strong and committed opposition today to President George W. Bush’s nomination for U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. James W. Holsinger, after it was revealed that he started a church in Lexington, Kentucky that has a ministry to “cure” gay people.
“Holsinger is an ideologue whose medical views on gay and lesbian people resemble sorcery more than sound science,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “The last thing America needed was another deplorable nominee who isn’t up to the job, but this is exactly what Bush delivered.”
Holsinger’s nomination will go before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, chaired by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) Presidential candidates Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Christopher Dodd (D-CT) sit on this committee.
I'm way past the "you must be freakin' kidding me" reactions when Bush pulls something like this, jabbing a sharp stick in the eye of the GLBT and scientific communities yet again.
What I find particularly interesting here is the makeup of the Senate committee that will vote on this nomination. Senators Obama and Clinton have been making some ovetures to the GLBT community fishing for votes, but now it's their votes that will speak volumes about how much support they will actually give the gay and lesbian people they want to support them.
Lesbian Moms Taking Pride in Mormon Country
This is one of the best explainations of why the GLBT community celebrates in the annual Pride festivals.
From the Salt Lake Tribune:
Their household includes two parents and two sons, but they're rarely considered a family.
When Kim and Ruth Hackford-Peer visited a public recreation center, they were not allowed to buy a family pass. When they take their sons to pose for a family photo or visit the doctor's office, people call them sisters. And when they hold hands walking down the street, strangers stare in disapproval.
"There's just not an acknowledgement that we're a family," says Kim, who's been with Ruth for 10 years.
But once a year, Kim and Ruth look forward to their "favorite holiday" - the Utah Pride Festival, an annual four-day event better known in the gay community as Pride.
Here, Kim and Ruth don't have to be prepared to defend their family from adults who mumble rude comments. They don't have to tell people that they are lesbians and not best friends. They don't have to worry about their sons - 5-year-old Riley and 1-year-old Casey - being ridiculed for having two mommies.
If for only a few days during Pride, they are recognized as a family.
"It's celebrating our relationship, our family, our existence," Kim says, playing with her boys in their east side Salt Lake County home.
Ruth, a 33 year-old educator, describes Pride as an event where gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender (GLBT) people can be "open" and don't have to feel ashamed of their lifestyle.
"It's about loving myself and who I am," she says. "It's about GLBT people celebrating the joys of being a queer person."
Pride is also turning into an annual tradition for gay families as the event organizes more kid-friendly activities, say gay parents.
Pride started in 1969 as a protest against discrimination and violence against gays in New York City, and today there are Pride festivals in cities worldwide.
That's what I learned at my first Pride event two years ago. It's about people celebrating who they are, especially since there are still a lot of people around who want GLBT people to hide in shame and not express their God given gift of homosexuality.
I strongly encourage members of the GLBT community to support their local Pride activities. I also highly recommend these events, especially the street festivals, to straight folks like me. If you've never been, I suspect it will be eye opening.
My church, Believers Covenenant Fellowship, will have a booth at Capital Pride in Washington DC on Sunday, June 10, just a few blocks down from the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue. If you're in the area, please stop by and say hello.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip on the article.
From the Salt Lake Tribune:
Their household includes two parents and two sons, but they're rarely considered a family.
When Kim and Ruth Hackford-Peer visited a public recreation center, they were not allowed to buy a family pass. When they take their sons to pose for a family photo or visit the doctor's office, people call them sisters. And when they hold hands walking down the street, strangers stare in disapproval.
"There's just not an acknowledgement that we're a family," says Kim, who's been with Ruth for 10 years.
But once a year, Kim and Ruth look forward to their "favorite holiday" - the Utah Pride Festival, an annual four-day event better known in the gay community as Pride.
Here, Kim and Ruth don't have to be prepared to defend their family from adults who mumble rude comments. They don't have to tell people that they are lesbians and not best friends. They don't have to worry about their sons - 5-year-old Riley and 1-year-old Casey - being ridiculed for having two mommies.
If for only a few days during Pride, they are recognized as a family.
"It's celebrating our relationship, our family, our existence," Kim says, playing with her boys in their east side Salt Lake County home.
Ruth, a 33 year-old educator, describes Pride as an event where gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender (GLBT) people can be "open" and don't have to feel ashamed of their lifestyle.
"It's about loving myself and who I am," she says. "It's about GLBT people celebrating the joys of being a queer person."
Pride is also turning into an annual tradition for gay families as the event organizes more kid-friendly activities, say gay parents.
Pride started in 1969 as a protest against discrimination and violence against gays in New York City, and today there are Pride festivals in cities worldwide.
That's what I learned at my first Pride event two years ago. It's about people celebrating who they are, especially since there are still a lot of people around who want GLBT people to hide in shame and not express their God given gift of homosexuality.
I strongly encourage members of the GLBT community to support their local Pride activities. I also highly recommend these events, especially the street festivals, to straight folks like me. If you've never been, I suspect it will be eye opening.
My church, Believers Covenenant Fellowship, will have a booth at Capital Pride in Washington DC on Sunday, June 10, just a few blocks down from the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue. If you're in the area, please stop by and say hello.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip on the article.
June 01, 2007
Groups Intensifying Efforts to "Redeem" Homosexuals
The efforts to "change" GLBT people to straight people are racheting up with new pushes by two organizations.
First, the Christian Post reports on expanded efforts by "ex-gay" group Exodus International:
In the past three decades, Exodus has challenged churches and the wider public who respond to homosexuals with ignorance and fear as well as those who uphold homosexuality as a valid orientation. And over the last five years since Alan Chambers stepped into presidency, the ex-gay organization has increased its number of member ministries to over 130 as well as its involvement in public policy issues and has become a prominent voice on gender issues, particularly in the wake of the Ted Haggard sex-and-drugs scandal.
Last summer, Exodus launched the Exodus Church Network, declaring itself a ministry of the church. Currently with 40 churches aligned to its network, Exodus helps churches to stand boldly on the truth of Scripture with regard to homosexuality, to minister to individuals struggling with unwanted homosexuality, and to create a nationwide referral list of churches for those searching for a church that will walk alongside them in their journey.
This report only prints one side of the issue and fails to mention how organizations like Exodus, by spreading the "ex-gay" myth, have destroyed lives and helped drive people to suicide.
The Southern Baptist Convention is also beginning a new initiative to "redeem" gay people. From Ethics Daily:
The Southern Baptist Convention is hiring a minister specializing in "gender issues" to help churches reach out and minister to homosexuals, without condoning same-sex relationships.
On Friday, Bob Stith, after retiring as pastor of Carroll Baptist Church in Southlake, Texas, becomes director of Southern Baptists' Ministry to Homosexuals Task Force.
Thirteen years ago Stith began to feel guilty about negative attitudes toward homosexuals coming across in his own preaching. He got involved in Exodus International, a Christian ministry that leads people out of homosexuality, and Living Hope, a non-denominational Exodus referral agency in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex.
In 2001 Stith made a motion at the SBC annual meeting to establish a task force "to inform, educate, and encourage our people to be proactive and redemptive in reaching out to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions." (The SBC didn't exactly rush into this did they?)
Stith told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that no one in his church or family had struggled with homosexuality. (No, they're probably tucked away in the closet)
"In all honesty, my preaching about it had been negative, focusing on biblical passages about sin but not redemption," he said. "Those who heard me preach would never have come to me for help. When I realized that, it broke my heart. This ministry is just something God put on my heart."
Stith's softer rhetoric contrasts with earlier statements by Southern Baptists denouncing homosexuality--such as the 1996 Disney boycott that targeted the company for providing domestic-partner benefits to gays--but it doesn't sway gay-rights groups like Soulforce and the Human Rights Campaign, who believe "ex-gay" outreach ministries do more harm than good.
I point these items out because it just makes it more impairative that GLBT Christians and their allies stand up and speak out, allowing THEIR message of God's love and redemption to carry the day. We needs to minimize the damage Exodus, the SBC, and any other groups that want people to deny who they are to conform to their limited understanding can do.
First, the Christian Post reports on expanded efforts by "ex-gay" group Exodus International:
In the past three decades, Exodus has challenged churches and the wider public who respond to homosexuals with ignorance and fear as well as those who uphold homosexuality as a valid orientation. And over the last five years since Alan Chambers stepped into presidency, the ex-gay organization has increased its number of member ministries to over 130 as well as its involvement in public policy issues and has become a prominent voice on gender issues, particularly in the wake of the Ted Haggard sex-and-drugs scandal.
Last summer, Exodus launched the Exodus Church Network, declaring itself a ministry of the church. Currently with 40 churches aligned to its network, Exodus helps churches to stand boldly on the truth of Scripture with regard to homosexuality, to minister to individuals struggling with unwanted homosexuality, and to create a nationwide referral list of churches for those searching for a church that will walk alongside them in their journey.
This report only prints one side of the issue and fails to mention how organizations like Exodus, by spreading the "ex-gay" myth, have destroyed lives and helped drive people to suicide.
The Southern Baptist Convention is also beginning a new initiative to "redeem" gay people. From Ethics Daily:
The Southern Baptist Convention is hiring a minister specializing in "gender issues" to help churches reach out and minister to homosexuals, without condoning same-sex relationships.
On Friday, Bob Stith, after retiring as pastor of Carroll Baptist Church in Southlake, Texas, becomes director of Southern Baptists' Ministry to Homosexuals Task Force.
Thirteen years ago Stith began to feel guilty about negative attitudes toward homosexuals coming across in his own preaching. He got involved in Exodus International, a Christian ministry that leads people out of homosexuality, and Living Hope, a non-denominational Exodus referral agency in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex.
In 2001 Stith made a motion at the SBC annual meeting to establish a task force "to inform, educate, and encourage our people to be proactive and redemptive in reaching out to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions." (The SBC didn't exactly rush into this did they?)
Stith told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that no one in his church or family had struggled with homosexuality. (No, they're probably tucked away in the closet)
"In all honesty, my preaching about it had been negative, focusing on biblical passages about sin but not redemption," he said. "Those who heard me preach would never have come to me for help. When I realized that, it broke my heart. This ministry is just something God put on my heart."
Stith's softer rhetoric contrasts with earlier statements by Southern Baptists denouncing homosexuality--such as the 1996 Disney boycott that targeted the company for providing domestic-partner benefits to gays--but it doesn't sway gay-rights groups like Soulforce and the Human Rights Campaign, who believe "ex-gay" outreach ministries do more harm than good.
I point these items out because it just makes it more impairative that GLBT Christians and their allies stand up and speak out, allowing THEIR message of God's love and redemption to carry the day. We needs to minimize the damage Exodus, the SBC, and any other groups that want people to deny who they are to conform to their limited understanding can do.
Transgender Minister Reappointed to Baltimore Methodist Church
A transgender United Methodist minister will be reappointed to lead his Baltimore congregation, church officials announced Thursday at a regional convocation.
The Rev. Drew Phoenix was greeted with applause after telling 1,600 members of the church's Baltimore-Washington conference that he had gone through "spiritual transformation" in the past year, since changing his name from Ann Gordon and receiving medical treatment to become a man.
"It is my intention and hope that by sharing my story that we commit ourselves as Christians and as United Methodists to become educated about the complexity of gender," Phoenix said. "Each of us is a beloved child of God - no exceptions."
Click here to read the entire report. You'll see that the opposition is just starting to warm up.
The Rev. Drew Phoenix was greeted with applause after telling 1,600 members of the church's Baltimore-Washington conference that he had gone through "spiritual transformation" in the past year, since changing his name from Ann Gordon and receiving medical treatment to become a man.
"It is my intention and hope that by sharing my story that we commit ourselves as Christians and as United Methodists to become educated about the complexity of gender," Phoenix said. "Each of us is a beloved child of God - no exceptions."
Click here to read the entire report. You'll see that the opposition is just starting to warm up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
