Falwell: Clergy Sex-Abuse Case a "Bump In the Road"

Excerpted from an article on EthicsDaily.com:

Jerry Falwell called high-profile allegations that a former pastor of a prominent independent Baptist church molested and raped numerous children over the course of decades a "bump in the road."

"When you hit a bump in the road--the pastor has mentioned six months here of challenges--forget the bump in the road. That's all it is. You've got to move on," Falwell said in a keynote address of a three-day meeting of the Southwide Baptist Fellowship at Trinity Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Fla.

Robert Gray, the former 30-year pastor who led the church out of the Southern Baptist Convention in the 1960s, was arrested in May. He is scheduled to stand trial Nov. 27 on two counts of capital sexual battery, because two of his accusers say he molested them when they were 6 years old.

Twenty-two people, including one man, have come forward since May to accuse Gray of abusing them. The other allegations involve children older than 12, meaning they cannot be prosecuted due to a statute of limitations.

Twenty two people accuse a church pastor of sexual battery and it's a bump in the freakin' road?!

I'm willing to bet the victims approach it a tad differently.

Of course, if your main purpose in visting a church is to keep them aligned with your political goals rather than ministering to their souls with the Holy Spirit, I suppose it's easier to look past these "bumps in the road."

In this follow-up piece, Ethics Today tells how leaders of the church covered up Gray's pattern of abuse out of fear that public knowledge would harm the effectiveness of the ministry.

If their leadership truly felt that way, I have to question how it could have possibly been effective in the first place.

Casting the First Stone

What was it that Jesus said, "He who is without sin cast the first stone."

There's a bunch of folks in Jerusalem who aren't following that guidance, using stones and bottles as part of their rioting against an upcoming gay pride parade. Religion plays a part in this--the rioters are apparently members of an ultra Orthodox Jewish sect.

This is scheduled to be the second annual such event in Jerusalem. Last year the organizers, a group called Open House, needed a court order to proceed. The parade featured over a dozen arrests and three stabbings.

Apparently people wanted to get an early jump on the violence in an attempt to get the parade cancelled to protect national security. Already, over 70 members of Parliment have signed a petition against holding the parade.

It just goes to show yet again that regardless of the struggles GLBT Americans have, there are others worse off.

Please join me in praying for the safety of those who participate in this event and the softening of the hearts of those who are using violence to protest.

Equality Maryland: "Preparing for a Bruising"

Dan Furmansky, the Executive Director of Equality Maryland, the LGBT advocacy group I belong to, issued a note to members regarding next week's elections. He is bracing supporters for more short term losses as several more states are expected to pass amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage, but remains optimistic for the long term:

"It may be little consolation on Nov. 8, but no matter what happens at the polls, eventually, we will win. No matter how many Americans stand against us, eventually we will win. The journey may be a long one, and we may bleed and bruise, but when it comes to basic fairness and justice, equality will always prevail."

Here is the entire note:

I wish it wasn’t necessary to write this, but it is. As an LGBT civil rights leader, I feel I must prepare our community for when voters go to the polls next week.

We were shocked and saddened when eleven states voted to change their constitutions to ban same-sex marriage in November 2004. Reading the gay press afterwards, it was as though we had no idea it was coming, and indeed, most of us hadn't prepared for it. We had hoped to win in Oregon, maybe even in Michigan...but we lost everywhere, in some cases to devastating margins.

Then, pundits and so-called progressives poured lemon juice into our wounds with their unscientific analysis that the marriage issue is what "cost us" the elections. Many LGBT Americans weren't feeling much of an "us" with John Kerry anyway, after he was the only MA member of Congress to speak out in favor of an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution, which the Legislature there thankfully rejected.

Those were dark days none of us want to relive, but we must steady ourselves once again. In a few weeks, media across the country will be reporting on all of the new states that have changed their constitutions. And we could lose in every one of the states with proposed amendments.
It might sting—badly—and right on the heels of New York and Washington high court marriage rulings against us.

I pray I’m wrong, and that instead we’ll be greeted with headlines like the one that appeared in the New York Times on October 14th: “Gay Marriage Losing Punch as Ballot Issue.” I want to see headlines announcing our victories in Wisconsin, South Dakota, Arizona, and everywhere.

But I'm here to urge us to be prepared for what we weren't last time. Most of what I read in the press these days contains hopeful pieces. A September Advocate article had the headline: "Poll: Opposition to Virginia same-sex marriage amendment grows." Several gay media outlets touted a poll from South Dakota that indicated only 48% of voters in that state support the amendment. The Blade reported two weeks ago: "fights in three other states – Arizona, South Dakota and Wisconsin – are competitive and too close to call."

Lord knows I couldn't do this work if an optimist didn't reside somewhere in this heart of mine. As someone who lived in Wisconsin for almost six years, I am hopeful that the first state to ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation will be the first to reject these repulsive public gay bashings that are wrapped up in the guise of "defining" marriage.

Indeed, we could come incredibly close in a few states, which would tell us that attitudes are changing. But close or not, if we fail on a popular vote across the board, the media will point and yell "losers" faster than you can say Foley Scandal. And some in our community will cannibalize those who steadfastly fight for equal marriage rights.

If this doomsday scenario comes to pass, we'll wear dark sunglasses for a couple of days. We'll empathize with those in our community who must wonder which of their neighbors voted against their family. But we'll move on.

We'll continue to fight, just as people have done for years before us, and will do years after us. We fought for seventeen years until we overturned a Supreme Court ruling that allowed for the criminalization of consensual same-sex relations. We survived DOMA, and have gone on to see relationship recognition in MA with equal marriage rights, CT and VT with civil unions, NJ, CA, and ME with domestic partnership registries, and HI with a reciprocal beneficiary law.

We are a community of survivors. No matter how much dung the Pat Buchanans of the world hurl at us, we will wash ourselves off and continue to fight for basic dignity and respect.

After we lost the marriage cases in Washington and New York, Evan Wolfson, head of Freedom to Marry, told a crowd of Equality Maryland members that the courts sometimes take the easy way out. After all, he said...it took thirteen state supreme courts to reject the argument that interracial marriage bans were unconstitutional before California's Supreme Court had the courage to strike down its ban in 1948—flying in the face of public opinion. After that brave ruling, six states changed their constitutions to “define marriage” in a way that would prevent interracial unions.

No matter what the setbacks, we must continue to view our movement as part of a broader movement for social justice. We must continue to draw inspiration and lessons from those who pioneered social change in the past and continue to welcome the partnerships of those doing this important work today in all areas of rights and freedoms.

As Dr. King said, "All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem." Our gains in Massachusetts, Canada, Spain, and other places have led to opposition and setbacks. Karl Rove and his cohorts are preying upon fear of change and "the other" to orchestrate a campaign that makes a constitutional amendment to limit rights socially acceptable and seemingly innocuous. The success of these amendments elsewhere makes our struggle here in Maryland increasingly important, especially with oral arguments to win marriage equality here scheduled before our high court for early December.

It may be little consolation on Nov. 8, but no matter what happens at the polls, eventually, we will win. No matter how many Americans stand against us, eventually we will win. The journey may be a long one, and we may bleed and bruise, but when it comes to basic fairness and justice, equality will always prevail.

"I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. That is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant."

Martin Luther King Jr., Accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, Dec. 10, 1964

Can You Judge a Man By the Company He Keeps?

I know that most of the readers here cringe at that word, "judge," but hopefully you are familiar with the cliche that question is based on.

Here is a case where we can certainly gain some disturbing insight into someone's character by who they are not only associating with but actively promoting. This article specifically refers to Dr. James Dobson and his two day love-fest with right wing sociopath Ann Coulter on the Focus on the Family radio program.

The article goes into plenty of detail about Ms. Coulter's background and how it made her a horribly inappropriate guest for any broadcast sponsored by a allegedly Christian organization. During one of the shows, Coulter referred to the title of her latest rant, Godless, the Church of Liberalism by saying, "they are the opposition party to God." Given her well documented public displays, some of which are listed in this article, it is not clear exactly what her credentials are to make that statement or offer any intelligent commentary regarding Christianity.

These appearances also further diminish Dr. Dobson's credentials as a minister while building them up as an operative of the Republican party.

An Example Of What We're Fighting

In the wake of last week's New Jersey court decision, a columnist named Kevin McCullough wrote a column on World Net Daily (a right-wing breeding ground) titled "Why Homosexuals Hate Marriage."

I mention this here to affirm how deeply rooted this bigotry is and the broad forum these people have to spew their hate. Here are some excerpts:

"Despite all that their angry-mob front groups argue in front of television cameras to the contrary, radical homosexual activists despise the institution, and more importantly the sanctity, of marriage. That is the fundamental reason why they are seeking to destroy the institution.

This week – dateline Trenton, N.J. – a unified panel of seven judges agreed that illegitimate sexual unions should be made equitable under law to that of monogamous married persons. Without the consent of the governed, these tyrants in black robes sat in judgment of healthy families across the universe and demanded that New Jersey residents accept immoral construction of sexual unions as the equal basis for families and family life in their recreated sexual, liberal utopia."

Of course, the judges wouldn't be "tyrants in black robes" if they had made the "acceptable" decison. How pathetic is that arguement? And what will the right wing say when they lose votes?

Want some more?

"But why? What's the real goal of the activists, the judges and the radicals who seek to subvert a moral worldview?

The answer is simple: No longer satisfied with practicing the unspeakable perverse sexual pleasures that their hearts seek in private bedrooms, they wish to be able to do so in public. They are also suffering from such immense guilt over their sexual behaviors, because they know inherently that the actions they perform are in fact unhealthy, that they will go to any means necessary to try and shut down the voices in their heads that tell them it is wrong.

Radical homosexual activists hate biblical marriage, because to achieve its benefits and blessings they must first conform to God's plan for sexuality, and the sinful nature in man is not willing to make such submission and conformity happen. The existence of joyful biblical marriage being practiced by "thumpers" in "Jesusland" infuriates them and thus the only action they can attempt is to destroy the institution that allows for such fundamental societal success.

Radical homosexual activists hate marriage because fundamentally they hate God, and the guilt of both drives them to extremes."

Sadly, this right-wing nut got a book published and is on the radio in the New York and Philadelphia areas. People full of this much hate, who have things so "simply" defined in their black-and-white world, who can so easily dismiss an entire group of people and lump them all in one, will not go away easily. Losing a court decision will only strengthen their resolve and have them coming back with more bigotry, more hatred, and more pronouncement's of God's judgement. They won't go away easily.

The God this hate monger speaks of is not the God I know, the God who sent Jesus down to earth to die for our sins. Thank God.

Will New Jersey Gay Marriage Ruling Energize Republicans?

This column on Time.com opines that it just might:

"What Republicans are hoping is that they can use the issue of gay marriage and the ruling to motivate conservatives in key states like Tennessee, Missouri and Virginia, where Republicans are in danger of losing Senate seats. Polls this year have shown small, but measurable drop-offs in enthusiasm from Christian conservatives and there's some worry about whether they will stay home on Election Day, particularly after the Foley scandal, which some conservative leaders blamed on congressional Republicans for being too afraid to take action against Foley earlier because it might be perceived as anti-gay.

Measures to ban gay marriage are on the ballot in nine states, including Virginia and Tennessee, and conservative activists will point to the New Jersey decision as a reason people in those states should go to the polls, even if they're dissatisfied with how the Republican majority has run the country. If that message resonates, the same people celebrating the New Jersey decision could be having mixed feelings about it come election day."

This column in the New Republic disagrees: (via the site Faith in Public Life):

But Democrats should relax. It's true that Rove and Co. will do their best to make this case a decisive electoral issue. But that won't be the cakewalk Democrats have nightmares about. America in 2004 is not America in 2006, Lewis is not Goodridge, and, no matter how much Rove might hope for an early Christmas, gay marriage fear-mongering isn't going to be the eleventh-hour savior that Republicans need.

For one big reason why, look no further than the substance of the opinion. Much like Goodridge, Lewis insists that the "unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples can no longer be tolerated under our State Constitution." But, unlike Goodridge, Lewis leaves an important question--what should we call this new bundle of rights?--to the state legislature, which has 180 days to provide an answer. The difference in substance will make a difference in the politics.....

And, because the court punts the definitional question to the legislature, Republicans will have difficulty deploying their favorite mythical creature--the crazed, power-thirsty liberal judge, brazenly sweeping aside the democratic will of a helpless public to pursue her own narrow vision of the good life......

The activist-judge trope will fail not just because the legislature is being kept in the picture, but because public consensus in the state is starting to favor gay marriage. A June poll by Rutger's Eagleton Institute for Politics found that "New Jerseyans, by a margin of 50 percent to 44 percent ... support allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally." And, when you drop the word marriage, as the court did, the support is even more robust: 65 percent of state residents support giving same-sex couples "many of the same rights and benefits as a married man and woman." Only 30 percent are opposed.

Support for the decision aside, there's also a serious question about how receptive the Republican base will be to the typical "homosexual agenda" scare tactics. This year's ballot initiatives raise that question better than anything else. When the Times did a roundup of the 2006 initiatives, it found, amazingly, that "supporters of same-sex marriage this year are likely to be as mobilized as the opponents." Whereas many of the 2004 ballot initiatives passed with popular support topping 70 percent, polling in Arizona, Colorado, Virginia and Wisconsin--four of the states with ballot initiatives up this November--show only narrow majorities in favor of them. In South Dakota, the ballot initiative might actually fail. The case might cause some polarization, but if the Times report is true, it should motivate both sides equally. This is not the stuff of 2004.

This is a desperate time for Republicans, and they will reach for anything that can stop their slide toward defeat. But there is little that indicates gay marriage is the right piece of underbrush to cling to: This case is not going to fire up that base. Call it homosexuality fatigue. Call it whatever you want. (Or leave it up to the legislature!) Just don't expect Republican demagogues to be able to change it.


The evangelical vote will probably be the largest undefinable wild card in the 2006 election, and the rights of same-sex couples to marry in several states is one of the main things hanging in the balance.

"It's Not Heaven, It's Not Hell, It's Purgatory"

That was the gist of the message from an e-mail distributed by Steven Goldstein, Chairman of the GLBT advocacy group Garden State Equality in regards to the New Jersey Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage.

Here is the text of the message:

Dear LGBTI New Jerseyans and our millions of straight allies across New Jersey:
I'd like to take a moment, if you'll allow, to have a frank discussion about one of the more unique phenomena that emerged from yesterday's decision on marriage equality. We can't recall seeing so many divergent reactions from our community and supporters to any single event. Many of the reactions were diametrically opposed: Some activists and organizations portrayed the decision as "a big win" or "total victory." Other activists and organizations portrayed the decision as all but a loss -- a bad day when we had expected a total win. Still others, most people actually, had a reaction in between.
We're all over the map as a community. It's understandable -- well, at least the opinions in the middle are understandable -- given the complex nature of the ruling. On the one hand, not a single justice said same-sex couples are unworthy of equal protection. On the other hand, we did not get marriage equality, though it's now up to us to make it happen in the legislature within 180 days.
It's not heaven, it's not hell, it's purgatory.
But here's the problem with telling anyone, whether your family, friends or even journalists, that the decision is a victory: It will hurt our efforts to win marriage equality in the next 180 days. It will, I swear to you, it will. But more on that in a moment.
Describing the decision as a victory at this premature juncture is wrong. If we don't win the label "marriage," we will NOT have equal protection under the law. You know this too well from following our e-mails on the late Lieutenant Laurel Hester. Without the label marriage, couples like Lt. Hester and her partner, and scores of others across New Jersey, have been told time and again, "we don't care with the law says, you're not married."
As we've said a million times and we'll say a million times more, marriage is the only currency of commitment the real world universally accepts. We're not fighting for the label marriage for some moral, ethereal right. We're fighting for the label marriage because it's the only way a gay civil rights law will work in the real world.
And that's what you have to tell everyone you know. Were you to tell folks "it's a win" -- and to be sure, 90 percent of our community and our supporters believe otherwise -- it would tie the hands of those of us at Garden State Equality working every day in Trenton to get a real win: Marriage equality.
Because then legislators would tell us, "You know, we're hearing people call the Supreme Court decision a win. Why are you pressing so hard for marriage then?"
I'll go beyond that point, and this I plead to you with all my heart. A nuanced statement, along the lines of "it's a win, it's not everything we wanted, but it's a win," will still hurt our efforts for marriage equality.
First, such statements would be a lifeline to legislators whom we have got to win over. People hear what they want to hear, particularly legislators looking for an excuse not to do the right thing. They'll grasp onto the clause in a nuanced sentence that gives them an out.
Second, the art of political communications tells us that both the general public and the power-elites, from the press to public officials to others who hold our fate in their hands, don't process nuanced statements well.
If you tell someone, "the decision is a win, but blah, blah, blah," you can bet the "blah, blah, blah" caveat won't be processed and/or reported. People will only hear the headline, i.e. "It's a win." And that would devastate our efforts.
It would lead to reactions like this: "Well, I just read that someone in your community called this a win, I don't understand why you're now saying it's not. Sounds like this civil unions idea is a sensible solution."
Friends, we have 180 days to win 100% marriage equality in the state legislature, as the Supreme Court ruled. I personally plead with you, with every bone and fiber in my body -- and I'm joined by thousands of others at Garden State Equality -- that even if part of you thinks it this was a win in the context of history, it's not what your message should be at this most sensitive, pressure-filled time.
The bottom line is this: Marriage is the only currency of commitment the real world universally accepts. Anything short of marriage equality deprives LGBTI families of the equal protection they so desperately need. Contraptions short of marriage, like civil unions and domestic partnerships, do not provide that protection, as we've learned through the New Jersey experience. Thus we do not have a win yet.
But we're going to work our hearts out to make that happen within 180 days. We're counting on you to be by our side.
Thanks for listening, as it were. All of us at Garden State Equality appreciate you from the heart.
Warmly, Steven Goldstein, Chair of Garden State Equality


From the other side, Matt Daniels, the president of "Alliance for (Straight) Marriage," continues to run his mouth in the mainstream media. This quote from the New York Times, which he was kind enough to distritute by e-mail:

New Jersey's highest court ruled on Wednesday that gay couples are entitled to the same legal rights and financial benefits as heterosexual couples, but ordered the Legislature to decide whether their unions must be called marriage or could be known by another name. But conservative groups opposed to same-sex marriage blasted the ruling as an example of the justices essentially trading judicial robes for legislative pens. ''The court is holding a legal gun to the head of the State Legislature, and saying, 'Listen, there are two bullets, you get to pick the bullet: either gay marriage or civil unions,' '' said Matt Daniels president of Alliance for Marriage, an organization based in the Washington area that supports a federal Constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. ''And that is not democracy. That is court-imposed policy-making that takes this out of the hands of the people.''

That's right, the courts took marriage away from being strictly in the hands of straight couples and allow same-sex couples, in some form, to share in it.

AFA Gets After Wal-Mart

The American Family Association, often a well-deserved object of scorn here, recently sent out an e-mail blast titled "Wall-Mart Rolls Out Red Carpet For Homosexual Marriage."

Among what the AFA considers the company's heinous sins are:

o Joining the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and being appointed to its board.

o Having the nerve to sell books that are supportive of same-sex marriage

Then this which really cracked me up:

"A quick search of Wal-Mart's website turned up the following number of items for sale: Gay - 1148 Lesbian - 468Transgender - 40 Bisexual - 38 Gay Marriage - 26 "

Personally, I think someone there has waaaaay too much time on their hands.

From my perspective, and I suspect that of most people who aren't aggressive homophobes like the AFA, Wal-Mart hardly comes across as a social activist. I have no doubt these measures were taken to promote business, and I applaud the company for that. It can only be a good thing, in my opinion, for large companies to be sensitive to the needs of GLBT consumers--a win-win for everyone involved.

Of course, the AFA just wants gay people to crawl back in the closet and it grinds their cookies when companies like Ford and Wal-Mart not only acknowledge the existence of the GLBT community but active engages it.

Good.

New Jersey Rules on Same-Sex Marriage

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled today in favor of same-sex marriage--sort of. A decision seemingly designed to avoid making anyone unhappy left both sides unhappy, which is usually how that goes.

As CNN reported: In a decision likely to stoke the contentious election-year debate over same-sex marriage, the New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled that state lawmakers must provide the rights and benefits of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.

The high court on Wednesday gave legislators six months to either change state marriage laws to include same-sex couples, or come up with another mechanism, such as civil unions, that would provide the same protections and benefits.

The court's vote was 4-to-3. But the ruling was more strongly in favor of same-sex marriage than that split would indicate. The three dissenting justices argued the court should have extended full marriage rights to homosexuals, without kicking the issue back to legislators.

In a release titled "Radical Activists Prevail in New Jersey Marriage Decision," the right-wing Alliance for (Straight) Marriage was not happy:

"This marks the second state -- after Vermont -- where radical activist groups have convinced state court judges to hold a gun to the head of the legislature," said Matt Daniels, president of the Alliance for Marriage. “The legislature will now be compelled to choose between two bullets -- all under court order. Either they create so-called ‘gay marriage’ or they create a civil union scheme that is identical. Either way, the people of New Jersey lose the right to decide -- freely and democratically -- to choose the course that is best for them, their families and their children.”

"Given the continuous attacks upon marriage in courts across the country, AFM's Marriage Protection Amendment is clearly the only hope for the American people to determine the future of marriage under our laws," Daniels added.

Daniels also added, "Most Americans believe that gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose. But they don't believe they have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society," said Daniels. "Americans want our laws to send a positive message to children about marriage, family and their future."

Let me insert a point here: Why shouldn't marriage be redefined? Doesn't the fact that the divorce rate hovers around 50% indicate that the institution, as now designed and practiced, falls WAY short of prefection?

Here's a positive message to kids about marriage: fall in love with whoever your heart leads you to, commit yourselves to that person, and stick with it. Just because it's always been done boy-girl and that's how it was in the bible doesn't mean boy-boy or girl-girl can't work and, more importantly, that God wouldn't bless it. Just because narrow minds don't understand something doesn't make it wrong, and it certainly doesn't mean that should be part of the U. S. Constitution.

Not all GLBT activists were completely happy with the New Jersey decision, however. This from Equality Maryland:

“If the true intent is to give all benefits to same-sex couples, then what is the point of calling it civil unions if not to caste a separate and negative class for LGBT couples,” said Executive Director Dan Furmansky. “This day will be remembered in history as one where a court of law granted some protections to same-sex headed families, but denied these families true equality and dignity under the law."

I tend to think that Dan is taking too much bloom off the rose today, but I also can't dispute his points. If I had invested as much of myself as he and other GLBT activists have to fight for the right to marry, I probably would not be satisfied with this incremental step either.

I still believe, however, that this was an important step forward for GLBT rights. People like Matt Daniels and his organization will insure that many, many more steps need to be taken before GLBT people will gain equality in marriage, but at least today there is one less obstacle to overcome.

U. S. Catholic Bishops to Define Their Stance on Gays

According to this report in the Boston Globe, the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops will be voting on a proposal at their next gathering that would condemn "scorn and hatred" of homosexuals. The bishops are also expected to declare that gay couples should not be allowed to marry or adopt children.

In other words, Catholics won't outright condemn homosexuals, but they won't recognize some of the basic rights and needs of human life for gays and lesbians either.

The report says they will reaffirm that "homosexual acts are `always sinful' and `morally wrong."

No big surprise there.

Sam Sinnett , the president of Dignity USA, an organization of gay Catholics, said the document "will be discussed entirely by celibate males, and their viewpoint is more concerned with keeping their jobs than being pastoral leaders."

As usual, it comes down to politics.

Churches Thrust Into Marriage Debate in Virginia

This report in the Roanoke Times shows how much of the political battle over the issue of same-sex marriage in Virginia is being fought from pulpits of churches and amongst congregations.

VAMarriage.org, a coalition that supports the measure, has asked pastors to give Nov. 5 sermons for "Marriage Protection Sunday." The group has handed out "pastor packets" and other tools to galvanize voters. This is apparently legal since the churches are not endorsing a specific political candidate.

Here are a couple of excerpts:

"Marriage is something that cannot be tarnished," said the Family Foundation's Victoria Cobb at a recent pastors luncheon in Roanoke. "We believe the churches are key. The pastors must lead and remind people that this is a biblical issue."

"People of faith are not all on one side of the issue," said Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, campaign manager for the Commonwealth Coalition, which opposes the measure.

"People of Faith for Equality in Virginia was formed more than a year ago to help voters understand that there are people of faith who are 'no' voters and that is OK. The other side doesn't have any campaign except to scare, shame and goad some people of faith into voting yes."


It personally makes me ill that churches are a political battleground. That is clearly not what Jesus had in mind and it angers me that some Christians can try to get me to believe that it is.

Are Right-Wing Attacks Actually Opening Closet Doors?

That is the conclusion of this article, which analyzes two U. S. government surveys.

The number of same-sex couples that identified themselves as such has increased 30% in just five years, a period which saw the general population grow 6%. Interestingly, some of the larger jumps were in the Midwest, especially Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

The survey also suggests that the push to outlaw same-sex marriage is encouraging GLBT couples to emerge from the closet to stand up and be counted. Six of the eight states with an anti-gay marriage initiative on this year's ballot -- Arizona, Colorado, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin -- saw rate jumps higher than the 30 percent national average.

A New York Times poll cited in this article showed that the understanding of what homosexuality is truly about is increasing. The poll showed that 53% of respondents thought that people do NOT chose to be gay, up from 43% in 1993. Also, the percentage of those who believe homosexuality is morally wrong has plummeted to 37%, down from 55% in 1993.

My conclusion from this data is that, eventually, ignorance allways loses.

Should Gay Rand epublicans Be Outed?

In the wake of the Foley scandal, that has become one of the hot button questions in politics and the GLBT community these days.

Blogger Ann Althouse offers her opinion:

"Honestly, I think these creepy, gleeful efforts at outing will only make social conservatives more conservative, and they will continue to look to the Republican party to serve their needs."

These is also a spirited conversation on this topic in the comment section (270 comments at this posting).

Andrew Sullivan shares a similar opinion on the topic.

"Look: I loathe the closet. I despise the hypocrisy in the Republican party. But a witch-hunt is a witch-hunt. If the gay left thinks it will advance gay dignity by using tactics that depend on homophobia to work, that violate privacy, that demonizes gay people, then all I can say is: they are wrong."

Michael Reagan goes on the counter attack:

"Mike Rogers is a scandalmonger who calls himself a "Gay activist blogger" devoted to "outing" alleged closet-gay Republicans."

"He's outing all of these targets, not caring who he hurts, simply because they don't agree with the radical gay agenda. There is no outrage from the Democrats or the media that there is somebody out there punishing conservatives who don't agree with the liberal gay agenda. "

Here's my take:

As a rule, I'm not in favor of outing myself. I've learned how traumatic an experience it can be and don't think anyone else should make that decision for someone unless there are serious mitigating circumstances.

I do belive, however, that a closeted gay person actively working to restrict the rights of other GLBT people makes them fair game to being outed. It's one thing for a person to have their own issues with self-loathing and inability to accept themselves, it's quite another for them to direct that energy into harming others by working to shape public policy.

Since integrity and motivation are often questioned by people on different sides of an issue, in my view the notion of if any Republicans or their staffers in Congress (the party that has tried to make discrimination against GLBT people part of the U. S. Constitution) are closeted gay people belongs on the table.

If they are lying about that, what else are they lying about?

I'd appreciate your thoughts on an issue that is colored in shades of grey.

James Dobson and his "Sheeple"

This column in the Denver Post starts out:

"There's a reason followers of the reactionary James Dobson are called "sheeple."
As chairman of the $145 million-a-year propaganda organization Focus on the Family, Dobson is the ultimate puppet master, giving conservative members of Congress marching orders in exchange for votes from his flock. "

This column goes on to show how Dobson's organization, now a Political Action Committee posing as a religious ministry, influences the votes of millions of people.

The columnist, Cindy Rodriguez, concludes:

"So wouldn't a person of strong moral values at least chide (Hastert for his inaction?

Nope. Not when you are a puppet master of members of Congress who use the name of God to pass laws that take away civil rights in exchange for campaign contributions and the promise of votes from the flock. A man of real moral values would urge Congress to increase college Pell grants, expand work training programs, and offer struggling working- class families subsidized day care.

Instead, he vilifies gay people as people who are destroying marriage. Dobson talks about having a pro-life agenda, but never speaks out against the deaths of more than 2,700 American troops in Iraq, or against capital punishment, which is really a euphemism for state-sponsored murder.
The sad part is the sheeple don't see the hypocrisy and don't realize they're being used."

Jesus didn't teach anything about selective morality. Dr. Dobson came up with that on his own.

Condi Rice Swears In (gasp!) a Gay Guy!

Boy, does the religious right have their collective undies twisted in a knot after this. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice swore in Mark Dybul as the nation's new global AIDS coordinator, a position that ranks him as an ambassador. Dybul is openly gay and the bible at his swearing in ceremony was held by his partner Jason Claire. During the ceremony, Secretary Rice referred to Claire's mother as Dybul's "mother-in-law." Yep, you could practically hear right-winger's underwear getting twisted up as those words came out of Rice's mouth.

Of course, religious right leaders responded, well, about like you would expect them to.

Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council, says the secretary's comments were "profoundly offensive" and fly in the face of the Bush administration's endorsement of a federal marriage protection amendment, though that backing be less than enthusiastic.

"We have to face the fact that putting a homosexual in charge of AIDS policy is a bit like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse," says Sprigg. "But even beyond that, the deferential treatment that was given not only to him but his partner and his partner's family by the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is very distressing."

Actually, I find his comments "profoundly offensive."

Info On GLBT History Month

The Equality Forum has put up an excellent web site in conjunction with GLBT History Month.

Found at http://www.glbthistorymonth.com/glbthistorymonth/, the site features the biography of an individual important to GLBT history every day for the month of October. The people covered range from Oscar Wilde to Sheryl Swoopes, Elton John to Barney Frank, etc.

I encourage you to check it out.

Research Shows Kids of Gay Parents Do Just Fine

To anyone with an open mind or who knows of any children raised by same-sex parents, this is a true DUH headline, but the fact that is was published in the mainstream press will hopefully make some people reconsider their position on adoption by gay parents.

The story in the Madison, Wisconsin State Journal, a state with gay marriage prohibition on the ballot this November, quotes NYU sociology professor Judith Stacey, who claims that anti-gay marriage groups have been dishonest in the way they used data from a study she conducted five years.

I'll give you a moment to get over the shock of that statement.

Moving forward, Stacey has updated her study with new research over the last five years.


"I have been surprised that the differences so far seem to be smaller than I would have guessed," Stacey said.

Stacey, who has always supported gay marriage, is co-authoring an update to the first article that looks at some 80 studies of gay and lesbian parents, single mothers and fathers and their children from several countries.

In the first article, Stacey's study examined potential limitations in the studies' samples of human subjects and methods. Today, there are still holes in what we know, she said, noting that many studies of same-sex parents have focused on well-to-do whites and have neglected minorities and the poor.

But she said a new wave of research is "much solider now," addressing more of those issues as well as children such as Hill, who were born into families of same-sex parents rather than to opposite-sex parents who later split up and took same-sex partners.

"The kids are fine. There's no evidence whatsoever that children of gay and lesbian parents have noticeably different outcomes on mental health," Stacey said of the findings. "They turn out at least as well.

These children may turn out somewhat better, she added. "It's not because of the sexuality but because of selection factors. It's because these are wanted children," Stacey said, noting that same-sex couples have to deliberately set out to conceive or adopt children. "When you're looking at heterosexual parenting, you have a lot of accidental" pregnancies.

There is a lot of interesting detail in the State Journal article, along with the obligatory dissenting opinion by a tool of Focus on the Family, that is worth reading.

Will There Be Success at the Polls for Same-Sex Marriage?

It could happen according to this USA Today article.

"It could be a watershed year," said Carrie Evans, state legislative director at the Human Rights Campaign, a gay and lesbian advocacy group.

Heading into next month's elections, opponents have gone 19 for 19 in winning state ballot initiatives that banned same-sex marriage, winning an average 70% of the votes.

That could change this year, however. Colorado could be the first state to vote in favor of same-sex domestic partnerships, and polls in Arizona and South Dakota are both running against banning same-sex marriage.

If these numbers hold up, that will fly in the face of the religious right's two favorite arguements in opposition; the voice of the majority and the overreach of activist judges.

I wonder what they'll come up in those states? I instinctively cringe at the thought.

"Ex-Gay" Lies and God's Love

About a month ago, I linked to a piece in The Advocate by a young man named Kyle Rice, who wrote about why he hated being gay.

Today, I'm linking to a response in the same place by Timothy Kinkaid, who writes for the outstanding site "Ex-Gay Watch." Tim was, like Kyle, raised as a conservative Christian and wrote this piece because Kyle's "reminded me of where I came from."

As I would have expected, Tim's piece is well written with compassion and empathy, encouraging Kyle not to head down the "ex-gay" path. Here's an excerpt:

"But the most damaging and difficult lie of all is that you cannot be gay and Christian.
I don't say that because I think Christians should never try to change their orientation. I say that because the vast majority of people who do try will never experience such a change.
And when they finally give up their long, futile struggle, they often believe that this means they must also abandon their faith. I pray that when you discover you have not become straight you will not then believe that you must give up your relationship with God."

I continue my prayers for Kyle and also give thanks for gay men like Tim who have walked through the fire of condemnation and doubt and emerged stronger for it.

Gay Animals Are Part of Nature

I don't really go looking for this stuff, but when I find it I post it because it does support the message I try to get across here.

As reported in The Advocate, a museum exhibition in Oslo, Norway, funded in part by the nation's government, provides extensive evidence of wide-spread homosexuality in the animal domain.

In a statement by the exhibitors, they said "We may have opinions on a lot of things, but one thing is clear—homosexuality is found throughout the animal kingdom; it is not against nature."

Geir Soeli, the project leader of the exhibit, titled "Against Nature," told Reuters: "Homosexuality has been observed for more than 1,500 animal species and is well-documented for 500 of them."

There are more details in the article (some a tad lurid), including the obligatory "burn in hell" statement from a Christian group in Norway, and some theories about why homosexuality survives among animals.

There's that darned science again, screwing everybody up with their facts and research.

Back in a few days

I'm off for a desperately needed respite from lengthy crunch at work. I'll have some new material on Monday.

On National Coming Out Day, More People Are

In a recent survey, 83% of people who identified themselves as gay or lesbian said they are out. Also, 70% of straight adults said they know a GLBT person.

The Advocate report contains this quote:

“If seven out of 10 heterosexuals know someone who is GLBT, then many gays and lesbians are making their identity apparent as a natural part of their lives—just like their age, height, hair color, or personality,” said Mark Shields, director of the Human Rights Campaign’s National Coming Out Project. “For most people, coming out or opening up to someone starts with a conversation. And for those interested in fostering strong, deep relationships with their friends and family, living openly often allows for closer relationships with the people they care about most.”

Just another reminder that society is not weakened when gays and lesbians come out. Society is strengthened when people accept who they are and live they lives accordingly in an open manner.

One More Day

It’s been two years since I lost my wife Bette on October 11, 2004. I still have the image burned in my mind of her lifeless body laying in our bed when I found her at home that day.

In some ways, it seems like just yesterday since we were sitting in the coffee shop at our favorite bookstore sharing articles we were reading from our different magazinzes or watching a Baltimore Ravens game together or just lying and holding each other in our bed. I can still feel her touch and see the look in her eyes, the one that told me she loved me with every fiber of her being and always would.

In other ways, though, it seems like a lifetime ago that we shared our lives with each other. A LOT has happened in my life over the last two years, and as this anniversary approached I wondered—what would I do if I had one more day with her and I could share what these last two years have been like without her. What if I could tell her what I’ve learned about myself, about our relationship, and the direction my life has gone without her.

I’d steer her away from the bookstore because there’s a lot that’s happened in the world that would really upset her. She felt at strongly as I did that our nation was heading in the wrong direction and that the Bush administration and the religious right was causing a deeper division among people, practicing exclusion instead of inclusion. We talked a lot about that during the 2004 political conventions and I was thankful she did not have to endure the reelection of President Bush.

I would bring Bette to my home where I could spend one-on-one time with her and really show her what my life is like now.

I would tell her how a day has not gone by without me missing her.

I would tell Bette how deeply I still love her and feel her love inside my heart and soul. As many of you know, I am happily remarried to Pastor Brenda and my love for her grows every time I see her, talk to her, or touch her. I don’t understand the dynamic of still loving Bette while giving myself completely to Brenda and I doubt I will ever be able to explain it, but I know it to be true.

I would show her some of my writing as evidence that I continue to pursue the dream we shared and spent so much time talking about. She would be pleased with my sportswriting and the progress I am making on my novel, and probably taken aback with my GLBT and political advocacy blogs. Since she spent a good chunk of her time before I met her advocating for disadvantaged people in Illinois and shared my perspectives regarding GLBT issues and politics, I think she would be proud that I have put myself out there to stand up for what I believe.

Bette would see a man much more at peace that he was two years ago. I had allowed myself to be beaten down by the world and had grown somewhat cynical and angry. I had lowered the bar for what I expected our of life beyond the quality time we had together. Most of that was because both of us, but especially me, had drifted away from fellowship with Jesus. I was trying to live a godly life without God’s help; a recipe for sure failure. I often felt I wasn’t as strong as I should have been in our marriage and in many ways not as good a man as she deserved. I’ve worked through a lot of that now, and I suspect she would pick up that vibe immediately—Bette always knew me better in many ways than I knew myself.

I would thank her for being the first person in my life to show me unconditional love and tell her how my life truly started the day I met her. Any happiness or success I have had since then or will have in the future has its genesis in that love and the way she showed her unwavering belief in me.

I would thank Bette for all the fun we had, often playing like little children. She was my baby girl and I was her baby boy, and we could be the happiest little orphans around. I would tell her how much I regret the time we could have had together but didn’t because I was too obsessed with work, sports, or just wanted to be by myself. The best times I had in our 12 years together were with her, not without her, and I wish I had made that a higher priority.

Bette often saw me struggle with balance in my life, and I’m doing a lot better with that these days. That is largely due to the influence of the Holy Spirit since I have embraced it as an active part of my day-to-day life. Part of that, however, is due to learning that I could withstand the worst possible thing that could happen in my life, losing her. Once that happened and I found out that I could still function, a lot of things bothered me a lot less than they used too. Surviving her passing left me with a giant dose of perspective I didn’t previously have.

I would tell her how glad I am that she experiences no more physical pain and has a peace that must surpass my understanding. She deserves to be at peace, and knowing she was made it possible for me to gradually accept her early departure from this world.

I would then introduce Bette to Brenda. I would tell Bette how much I love Brenda, and in many ways I can give and also receive Brenda’s love because of what I learned from Bette. At that point, I suspect Bette would look at Brenda and see something familiar. Bette had a way of looking at me, what she called “the Jimmy look,” that was full of passion and a totally committed, eternal love. She would probably notice Brenda gazing at me in that same way, and that look would say more than any words ever could. I expect that they would embrace and Bette would say that, as much as she wants to be with me, she will be at peace knowing I am being loved and taken care of.

As our time drew to a close, I would walk Bette to the door and pray with her, thanking God for bringing her into my life and giving her eternal life. I would then hold her like I used to, not wanting her to go but knowing she must. I would let her go, we would pledge eternal love to each other, and then her earthly body would fade away as she returns to heaven.

I would return to Brenda, hold her like I never want her to go, pledge my eternal love to her, then bury my head in her shoulders and cry like a baby; exhilarated from seeing Bette and showing her this wonderful life I have now and devastated by losing her again.

It would be then be time to look forward again, building upon the blessings that God has given me, none greater than my wonderful wife and partner Brenda who accepts and appreciates the role Bette played in my life and the love I will always have for her.

If you haven’t told the person you love how special they are to you and what makes that so, please get up from your computer right now and tell them or call them if they’re not with you.

Fortunately, I left very little unsaid with Bette. One of my best friends told me Bette’s sudden passing taught him to take more time to appreciate his wife and tell her he loves her. I know I do that with Brenda, and I hope you do also.

Don’t wait until your life is impacted by tragedy to jumpstart your life like I did. Do it now while your loved one is still here to share it. I won’t have this second chance I just wrote about, and neither will you.

"Sin is Neither Republican or Democratic"

That would probably come as a shock to many of the Republican operatives we know as the religious right. Here is a piece by author Diana Butler Bass that makes this point and more. Here's an excerpt:

"Making sexuality a political issue, as much of the Religious Right has done, distracts from a host of other issues, such as poverty, war, and environmental concerns. But it also obscures the fact that Christians agree (as my friend and I do) on many things regarding this intimate part of our lives. We agree that sexuality is a gift from God, that love and commitment are foundational to sexual expression, that marriage is the best vessel for human sexuality, and that authenticity, honesty, fidelity, and mutual regard form the basis of Christian sexual relationships. Sex is, theologically, an ultimate expression of self-giving and surrender, qualities that resemble those in Christian spirituality. As the medieval mystics taught, humanity sexuality is a metaphor for our relationship with God."

"God is, as scripture tells us, the author of all goodness. God never rejoices in sin, and we know that sin is not the exclusive possession of any political party. The darkness that stalks us is neither Republican nor Democratic. It is part of the human condition, that which makes us all cry out for compassion—and that compassion is an apt starting point for a Christian politics of grace, not partisan vindictiveness."

Doesn't that put things in their proper, balanced perspective?

Conservatives Contradict Themselves in Foley Scandal

As this report from the San Francisco Chronicle states, there are conservatives who are trying to weasel out of responsibility for permitting sexual predator Rep. Foley to continue unpunished until he was recently outed.

There are conservatives who are saying they feared taking any action against Foley because they would then be labled as gay-bashers. Of course, they are saying that while people like Tony Perkins are gay bashing with the old, inaccurate, correlation between homosexuality and pediopheila.

From the Chronicle report:

"Patrick Sammon, executive vice president of the Log Cabin Republicans, a 20,000-member national group of gay and lesbian Republicans, scoffed at the notion that Hastert and other GOP House leaders dragged their feet on the Foley case because of the gay-bashing issue.

"These anti-gay groups should be ashamed. They're trying to use this horrible situation to advance their own agenda. It's despicable,'' said Sammon, who decried Foley's conduct. "This is a personal and political scandal. It should not be used to denigrate gay and lesbian Americans.''

Hopefully voters will remember that in November.

Judge's Nomination Held Up Due to Committment Ceremony

Notoroius anti-gay senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) is holding up the nominaton of Janet T. Neff to the U. S. District Court in Michigan because she participated in a committment ceremony for a same-sex couple.

According to this report in The Adovacte:

Brownback cited recent instances in California and New York where local officials issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples contrary to existing laws. ''I don't know what she did,'' Brownback said. ''That's why there's a factual question.''

Brownback has asked the U.S. Justice Department for a formal legal opinion in addition to asking Neff specific questions. Joe Solmonese, president of the gay advocacy group Human Rights Campaign, said commitment ceremonies ''have nothing to do with the law. This was a symbolic expression of love between two people. This is nothing more than Sam Brownback looking for another opportunity to rear his bigoted head and find a way to attack gay people."


Brownback claimed about the judge's actions, "''It seems to speak about her view of judicial activism."

I believe this actually says a lot more about Senator Brownback's views on judicial activism than judge Neff's. After all, if the legislature filters out judicial appointments of people who don't agree with them, isn't that a passive-aggressive type of judicial activism in itself?

UCC Strikes Back at FRC's Latest Homophobic Smear

In my recent post about the scandal swirling around former congressman Mark Foley's e-mails to underage pages, I wrote about comments spewed by the head of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins. He used this situation to claim that "the real issue was the link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse."

The leader of the United Church of Christ, their general minister and president Rev. John H. Thomas, has stepped up and taken a stand. "Perkins recent remarks are destructive to gay and lesbian persons and their families and distract the nation’s attention from the real issue at hand, which is protecting young people from sexual predators,” said Thomas."

“To suggest that gay and lesbian persons should be barred from public service, as Perkins has implied, is akin to suggesting that white, straight males should be kept out of politics because of Bill Clinton’s sexual misdeeds,” Thomas said. “To attach this debate to sexual orientation is not only ludicrous, it’s dangerous. Many gay and lesbian persons serve honorably in public office.”

“If anything, this nation’s culture of silence with respect to gay and lesbian people has taught us that hiding, shame and denial, as in Foley’s case, are not healthy ways to live as a gay or lesbian person — not for them as individuals and not for us as a society,” Thomas said.

“One of the tragic elements in the recent incident involving Mark Foley is the way the media give credence to those who make the unfortunate, salacious and inaccurate leap that Mr. Foley’s behavior is rooted in his sexual orientation.” Chase said. “Such characterization slanders an entire group of citizens and fuels the forces of suspicion and division that plague our country.”

Well said, Rev. Thomas. It's good to see a religious leader with perspective who is willing to take the initiative to speak out against ones who misrepresent facts in order to spread hatred and bigotry.

GOP Leaders Sell Out Principles to Protect Foley's Vote

When you hear Republicans talk ad nauseum about values, keep this in mind--they value nothing more than winning and don't care who gets hurt in the process.

I believe that was already fairly obvious, but information coming out regarding the Mark Foley situation makes that even more so.

Foley, of course, is the Republican congressman who resigned last week after the revelation of perverted e-mails he sent to underage congressional pages. More is coming out about how much the party's leadership, all the way up to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, knew about the situation and their failure to take any action besides informal warings to pages to stay away from him.

The Republicans valued Foley's party-line voting record more than protecting young volunteers from a sexual predator.

Meanwhile, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council used this situation to launch another right-wing attempt to tie in homosexuality and pedophilia. Classy move, but about what I would expect.

One of the functions of government is supposed to be the protection of it's citizens. Who, then, will protect us from the government and its alleged leaders?

"Religion Gone Bad"-Drifting Away From Jesus

I'm linking to a review over at the excellent site "The Prodigal Sheep" of Mel White's latest book, "Religion Gone Bad." Here are a couple of excerps:

"White traces the development of this movement and its growth in influence through the particular prism of its apalling and utterly inexcusable treatment of LGBT people. Drawing on sociological research into the roots of fascism, he explores the uncanny and extensive parallels between historical fascist movements and the spirit of fascism masquerading as 'Judeo-Christian' morality."

"White doesn't really ask this question outright, but it's hard not to: What is the difference today between moderate-to-extreme Islamic mullahs who preach death to Jews and Westerners in their mosques and whose words incite others to hateful violence, and 'Christian' fundamentalist clergy who preach death to gays and lesbians from their pulpits and whose words also incite others to acts of violence?

There is none."

"If the American Taliban have their way, LGBT people won't merely be pushed back into the closet but will be permanently made second or third class citizens, or worse."

There is some very thought provoking, and scary, stuff here. Check out the entire review, then I suspect you may want to read the book.

"Healing, Feeding, and Loving, Not Nationalism"

This is a wonderful, heartfelt editorial written by a pastor in the Midwest and published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Here are the parts that jumped out at me:

"I want to celebrate my unity with sisters and brothers who seek to follow the God that I know in the healing, feeding and teaching ministries of Jesus, not the ones who use Jesus' name to bomb abortion clinics. I want to build on the unity that I share with others who recognize God's kingdom as one of justice, peace and inclusive love, not those who use Jesus' name to preach hate. I no longer trust that a container labeled "Christian" necessarily has contents that I'm willing to share"

"We would like to say that all Christians share the basic values of God's love, but it is in the name of Jesus that the Alliance Defense Fund trains attorneys "to battle the radical homosexual legal agenda." In the name of Jesus, American Vision's leader, Gary DeMar, writes that another "long-term goal" should be "the execution of abortionists and parents who hire them."

I think I would be really blessed if I ever have the opportunity to visit Pastor Hawker's church.

Not Exactly Civil Discourse on Civil Unions

Thanks to PageOneQ for this tip on this disturbing story.

An incident occurred in a restaurant in suburban Milwaukee recently that shows just how deep the irrational, visceral hatred of GLBT people and the opposition to them having basic rights like marriage can run.

A group of lesbian, gay and transgender friends were sitting in this restaurant discussing the proposed Wisconsin constitution amendment that would ban civil unions and gay marriage. During that private, peaceful conversation, an individua joined them and eventually started punching two of the people involved. Before he fled the scene, he threw chairs and other objects and threatened to shoot someone.

The local police have yet to make an arrest, and the Antiviolence Project of the Milwaukee LGBT Community Center is pushing for hate crime charges to be filed in the case.

I don't post this story to even remotely imply that this is typical of opposition to GLBT rights, but when is the last time you heard of a gay or lesbian person or a GLBT ally tearing up a restaurant or committing any similar act against people who oppose those rights.

While I am not comfortable with some comparisons I have heard to the civil rights battles of the 1960's and the struggle for GLBT equality, this incident does raise up one common thread in my mind. The hatred and bigotry that must be overcome to insure equality for GLBT people, just like it was for African-Americans, is deeply imbedded in a frigtheningly large portion of this nation's population. As anyone who pays attention knows, it has hardly disappeared regarding the African-American community and will be a constant presence through this generation and those who follow. Only continued advocacy and education can make that gradually diminish, and we can already see some evidence of that happening in today's society.

There is a long, long, long way to go, however, and it is incumbent upon GLBT people and their allies to keep pushing and advancing the cause. Equality won't happen by itself.

Congressman Resigns Over Lewd E-Mails to Teenage Boys

Mark Foley, a powerful Republican congressman from Florida, resigned today as more information came out about e-mail and instant messaging exchanges he had with male teenage pages.

I don't post the story here as another example of how evil Republicans or politicians can be. This is another example of what appears to be a self-loathing gay man buried deep in his closet, something I find very sad.

What is even sadder and more harmful is that this man was the chairman of the House caucus on missing and exploited children. He crusaded against using the Internet to sexually exploit those who were under age, even calling those who were guilty of this "sick people; they need mental health counseling." He was also, of course, very outspoken against gay rights.

It's bad enough when a person can't look themselves in the mirror and accept who they are. It's even worse when they have the power to not only hurt themselves but others like them, punishing others for their self-loathing.

At least now there will be one less person in Congress with the power to do that.

WHOSOEVER: Unhealthy Faith

10 Beliefs of an Unhealthy Faith

1. God's love and favor depends on my behavior.
2. All ministers are people of God and can be trusted.
3. Material blessings are a sign of spiritual strength.
4. I can work my way to heaven.
5. Problems in my life are a result of some kind of sin.
6. If it's not in the Bible it isn't relevant.
7. A strong enough faith will protect me from problems and pain.
8. God hates sinners, is angry with me, and wants to punish me.
9. Having true faith means waiting for God to help me; doing nothing until He does.
10. More than anything else God wants me to be happy.

Hate Mongering at the "Values Voter Summit"

Yes, apparently hate was one of the values in great demand at the summit held in Washington, DC last weekend. The "Values Voter Summit," led by James Dobson, Tony Perkins, and the other religious right "standard" bearers, featured some tough talk directed to the LGBT community (that might be you) and its allies (people like me). Here are some of the lowlights:

Bishop Wellington Boone, founder of the Wellington Boone Ministries: "But I want to tell you something is, they (GLBT people) don’t know, we’re driven by God to deal with this stuff, and I want to say to you that, in this regard, I’m not playing with you. That when it comes to the matter of this gay stuff, I know that a family is not a man and a man or a woman and a woman. It’s a man and a woman. That’s the creative order, and I’m not backing down."

Rev. Dwight McKissic of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Texas: As reported by People For The American Way. "he said, the gay rights movement was inspired “from the pit of hell itself,” and has a “satanic anointment.” The gay rights movement was birthed and inspired by the anti-Christ. He suggested that the anti-Christ is himself gay, citing a verse from the book of Daniel saying the anti-Christ will have no desire for a woman."

I would not suggest you blow these off as just intolerant rantings. This conference attracted several potential Republican presidential candidates and the current U. S. Attorney General. These statements and other intolerant, hateful remarks were not made as some little backwards church gathering in the heat of the moment on a Sunday morning. This was a serious national convention attended by some of the leading policy makers in the United States!

I'm posting these remarks and writing about the "Values Voter Summit" to make you angry (not at me please, I'm only the messenger). Hopefully any thoughts you have about sitting out the 2006 elections are overcome by reading trash like this. None of those presidential candidates sniffing around trying to gain favor with the mighty religious right came out and said anything publicly opposing this hatred.

It's up to the GLBT community and its allies to come out and publicly oppose the right wing's policies of discrimination and condemnation, especially when it comes time to cast you ballots on November 7.

IRS Targets A Church-A Pro-Gay Church

When you see the first part of that title, you may be thinking it is about time the IRS followed through on its threats to crack down on the legal restrictions of political activities by non-profit organizations. There would probably be widespread agreement about that point among the readership here, revoking the tax-exempt status of churches who preach politics rather than God's word.

You might be surprised, like me, to learn that their current target is a pro-gay, anti-war church in Pasadena, California. One would think that, with all of the right-wing, anti-gay political rhetoric being spewed from pulpits around the country the IRS might be putting the squeeze on one of them but noooooooooo, a liberal church is under investigation because of an anti-war sermon preached during the 2004 campaigns.

Maybe I'm getting a bit jaded, but I find the choice of this church quite odd. It couldn't have been politically motivated could it?

Of course, if any IRS representatives read this--I'm with you, you folks do a great job! Please don't audit me.

Announcing a new project, "Disciples From the Left"

I am proud and excited to announce a new project that I believe is a natural outgrowth of this blog. I am now editing a blog titled, "Disciples From the Left." The viewpoint of that blog will be similar to Straight, Not Narrow except that I will be addressing a wider range of issues. Rather than focus on GLBT related issues, I will be discussing topics like the war in Iraq, the economy, terrorism, and anything I find significant in the political arena. As I do here, I will be relating events and policies back to the Bible and the will of God. I believe much of what has been done in the U. S. society in recent years with the name of God attached to it has little to do with Him. I hope to provide a clear view of what the Holy Spirit has led me to believe is the TRUE will of God, one that does not include this nation continuing to move toward a totalitarian state, where torture is actually something to be debated, where rights are being restricted and privacy invaded on a routine basis.

It is time for Christians to take a stand, and I want to be counted among those who do stand up for God's true word and will for our lives.

I hope you check it out at http://disciplesfromtheleft.blogspot.com

I am also seeking other like-minded individuals to participate in the project. Please notify me by e-mail at straight_notnarrow@yahoo.com if you have something you want to say and would like to do on "Disciples From the Left."

Evangelicals May Stay Home On Election Day

As hard as it may be to believe, this report tells us that there is enough dissatisfaction among conservative evaneglical voters to put their turnout at the polls in November at risk.

Although the religious right has dominated the debate on issues like same-sex marriage, the fact that they have not forced a complete surrender among it's advocates has resulted in some disappointment with the Republicans who have been at the forefront of that and other so-called "values issues."

Of course, the folks at Focus on the Family are doing their best to keep the pot stirred. They are distrubiting a DVD titled, "Why Not Gay Marriage?" The video answers ten questions such as "How will my same-sex marriage hurt your marriage?" and "Is it healthy to subject children to experimental families?"

Many churches around the nation are holding "non-partisan" voter registration drives. Anything to do with a political election that is conducted in a church, while it may not be illegal, is in my view simply wrong, regardless of the "non-partisan" focus. Do ministers go and preach the gospel at polling locations? I don't think so.

Harry Knox, director of the religion and faith program at the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay rights group, said religious progressives are beginning to speak out on gay marriage and other issues.

He said, for example, that the Human Rights Campaign recently launched its "Out In Scripture," a free weekly online resource to help clergy in planning their sermons and spiritual discussion groups.

"People on our side of the conversation, who have been silent for a long time, are tired of being silent," Knox said.

Amen to that!

Thanks to Jerry Maneker's site, "A Christian Voice for GLBT Rights" for the link.

"Old Time Religion With a Gay Twist"

Wayne Besen has an interesting column up on his site about a revival meeting in the foothills of western North Carolina led by ex-gay minister Tim Wilkins.

Besen attended the meeting and noticed a surprising dynamic in the audience:

"Most significant, however, was when Wilkens asked the crowd if they knew someone who was gay. A sea of hands rose and the preacher remarked that when he asked this question ten years ago, less than 10 percent of audiences raised their hands. Today, he said, the number can exceed eighty percent of a congregation. Here, in the foothills, it was becoming clear that the gay community had gained a foothold. The crowd was not there to gripe about homosexuals, but searching for ways to grapple with a loved one who had come out."

We can only pray that Wilkins' message didn't do too much harm to the relationships between those folks who raised their hands and the GLBT people that caused them to be in the air.

Changing My Policy on Comments

I do most of the talking on this blog, but I also listen and learn from the input I receive from my terrific readers. Recently, I have received some very constructive feeback, both publicly and privately, regarding the increase in negative comments being posted here.

When I started this blog, my goal was to keep it as an open forum where people on both sides of issues relating to the GLBT community could have a say. While I still think this is the ideal approach, it has become clear to me that it is not a viable one. My first priority here is to advocate for GLBT individuals, to be a place that gay Christians can come and receive the word of God and updates on issues relevant to them. I also want it to be a safe place for GLBT people who are struggling and have been deeply wounded by the homophobic religious right. I want them to be able to come here and find some word that will help them start the healing process and realize that God loves them just as much as he does me and Pastor Brenda.

The bottom line is I want this to be a safe place for GLBT people, somewhere they can come without having to worry about being attacked. In the spirit of trying to keep an open forum, I have allowed people to post some very hateful messages. Even thought they have been responded to in kind, I have grown to understand that the fact they are here in the first place can be hurtful. For anyone who has read some of those comments and been angered or hurt, please accept my apology.

It won't happen again.

If anyone wants to question scripture references and ask how I can feel a certain way, read the blog. I'm approaching nearly 300 posts and covered a lot of ground. If you're asking a sincere question, the answers are probably there. If not, don't bother posting a comment. If you want to post slanderous, homophobic, bigoted, hateful messages, take it somewhere else or start your own blog. Those type of comments will be deleted without exception.

Anybody who wants to challenge me on something is welcome to send an e-mail to straight_notnarrow@yahoo.com. I continue to hope there are people out there who will read the material here and ask questions with an open mind. Those folks are still welcome to comment and join our discussions.

Rather than stiffle discussion here, I want to encourage it. I often find the constructive comments here are better than my original post. Many readers have commented to me that this blog has been a blessing to them. Well, it works both ways--people who actively participate here have richly blessed me.

Aren't we all supposed to support and help each other grow? Isn't that what God had in mind when He first popluated the earth?

WHOSOEVER: Don't let anger make you sin

"Be angry, but do not sin. Do not let the sun go down on your wrath, neither give place to the devil." Ephesians 4:26,27 MOD

God knew we would have occasion to be angry. More than that, God knew we would have occasion to be filled with wrath. God also knew that being in a place of anger or wrath can potentially make us vulnerable to the devil. So, in God's loving wisdom and kindness, He made a way for us to stay clear of the devil's influence. He instructs us to get over it. He instructs us to not let a day go by before we deal with the anger. Otherwise, we leave ourselves wide open to the attacks of the enemy just like blood in the water where sharks are feeding.

God would not have given us such instructions if it weren't possible to accomplish. The Holy Spirit is ever present to give us strength, guidance, and comfort. All we have to do is call on His help..... and get over it.

"I Hate Being Gay"

I found this gut-renching essay on The Adovcate.com written by a young man named Kyle Rice in Washington State. Kyle is fighting a battle in his heart and soul that he appears to be losing. For example:

"I focus on fighting efforts to force the "gay agenda" on those of us who know God does not accept homosexuality. Although I do not condone discrimination, I also do not support gay marriage laws or many of the other issues backed by gay rights groups. I am a proud conservative Republican, and I support political candidates who feel the same way I do."

Kyle is so indoctrinated by the religious right's message of condemnation that he supports legislation that restricts his own rights. He's also deep into self-loathing, writing:

"I know God would not approve of me acting on my gay feelings, and I have no right to question his directive. I know that in the end I will be happy I lived my life according to God’s standards the best that I could. That means refusing to accept being gay."

People like Kyle are one of the primary groups my church and this blog are trying to reach out to. It appears he has never been taught that he doesn't have to choose between being a Christian or accepting himself for who he is because God accepts him.

Sadly, I very strongly believe that he is mistaken in his belief that he can deny who he really is and still live a happy life. He and many others like him have allowed Satan to speak to him through those who don't understand or intentionally misrepresent God's word and prevent him from experiencing the fullness of life as a gay Christian.

I hope you will join me in praying that Kyle Rice can soon accept himself for who he is and discover the life that God has planned for him.

The Hypocrisy of James Dobson

I write a lot about Dr. Dobson and his campaign of hate and discrimination against the GLBT community. Here is another piece about Dobson that echoes many of the sentiments I have expressed on this blog. The writer, Robert Parham, is the executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.

He writes, "Dobson may have finally gone too far in pushing a political agenda under the guise of morality. Sincere pastors may finally turn him off for transgressing the boundaries between conservative Christian values and political conservative leaders."

We can only hope.

Series on Christianity and Homosexuality

David W. Shelton, a gay Christian who is pastor of Christian Community Church in Clarksville, Tennessee, was kind enough to let me know about an in-depth series he is writing about Christianity and Homosexuality.

David is meticulously going through the key scriptures that are often used by the religious right to condemn homosexuality. It is some excellent work that is worth taking time to read.

Thanks for the head's up David.

Click here to read David's series on his blog, "Skipping to the Piccolo"

Clarifying Where I Stand

Some of the regular readers of this blog have probably followed the discussion between myself, a man who posts as “Stuffed Animal,” and Jerry Maneker. Both of them, particularly Stuffed Animal, have taken me to task for being willing to engage in dialogue with those who feel that homosexuality is a sin. I have found Stuffed Animal’s comments to be driven by a deep, perhaps even visceral, anger at injustices done to him and other GLBT people. He has taken offense to my toleration of anti-homosexual comments on this blog, a view which Jerry appears to share.

I have written that I disagree with an approach that, in my opinion, too closely resembles that of the bigots that cause such pain and draw GLBT people into self-loathing and other negative views of life. The anger that comes across in Stuffed Animal’s comments troubles me and I have commented to him that I don’t feel he’s channeling it in a positive, constructive manner. The response from Stuffed Animal has been that by tolerating views that do not directly and strongly support the place of GLBT people in the Kingdom of God, I am doing a disservice to the community and compromising the effectiveness of my advocacy.

Fair enough. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of how to most effectively advocate equality for GLBT people in politics and the church.

Over on Jerry’s blog, Stuffed Animal continues to write about this blog, dialoging with Jerry. He refers to me as “Rev. Jim” when I am not in fact an ordained minister or have ever claimed to be. My wife is, but not me. No big deal, in fact I took it as a compliment.

He got another fact very, very wrong that has angered me and needs to be corrected lest anyone draw the same incorrect conclusion.

Stuffed Animal posted, “Deep down, I believe Jim accepts the lie that God condemns homosexuality as sinful, and that's why he can't see it for the damaging thing that it is. He thinks that if the Bible bullies will just stop being so virulent, and the Gay activists will just stop being so militant, then we can all find common ground and sit quietly together in church.”

That is simply a load of crap. I was disappointed that Jerry agreed with it since he and I have shared numerous constructive exchanges over the last few months.

It is beyond me how any reasonable person can read this blog and draw that conclusion. Nonetheless, just in case someone else could, allow me to state how I feel very, very clearly.

I believe that all people are equal in God’s eyes regardless of the sexual orientation they are born with. We are equal brothers and sisters who have redemption available to us because Christ sacrificed Himself for our sins. I believe couples of the same-sex should have equal rights to marry just like Brenda and I did. I believe God blesses monogamous, covenant relationships regardless of the genders of the partners. I believe God loathes promiscuity regardless of the gender of the participants. I believe GLBT people need legal protections, not “special rights” to protect their ability to hold down jobs, adopt children, and do anything and everything I can do as a straight person without having to stay in the closet.

My wife, Pastor Brenda, believes the same things. She has ministered to the GLBT community for nearly 20 years and is one of the people who continue to enlighten me about the injustices and ministry needs of GLBT people.

If anyone doubts that I feel this way, please check out anything I have posted on this blog. If you see something I wrote that makes you think Stuffed Animal is right, I would sincerely like to know. Perhaps I misstated something or put it in a way that was not clear, that’s always possible.

Just show me the courtesy of telling me directly, either by commenting on the blog or by e-mail. I’d rather not stumble across negative comments about me on someone else’s blog.

A Republican Who Gets It

John Danforth, a former U. S. Senator who is also an ordained Episcopal minister, has a new book coming out next week, and the web site Raw Story posted a piece excerpting quotes from an advance copy they received.

The book is titled Faith and Politics, and Danforth has some unkind words directed toward the Bush administration (he reportedly was second choice for Vice-President behind Cheney) and the religious right.

Regarding the concept of American being a "Christian nation":

"Some people have asked me whether America is a Christian country. The answer must be no, for to call this a Christian country is to say that non-Christians are of some lesser order, not full fledged citizens of one nation."

Regarding the Republican war (they do love that word, after all) against the GLBT community:

"I believe that homosexuality is a matter of sexual orientation rather than preference," he writes. "Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is, in my view, comparable to discrimination on other civil rights grounds. It is wrong, and it should be prohibited by law.
I think that the only purpose served by the campaign for the amendment (banning same-sex marriage) is the humiliation of gay Americans, advocated by the Christian right and eagerly supported by its suitors in the Republican Party," he adds. "In reality, it is gay bashing."

This sounds like a book worth reading. You can buy it on Amazon.com.

Senator Danforth continues to be a man worth listening to. I pray that some of his fellow republicans are doing just that.

Thanks to PageOneQ for the link.

Fear Is Not a Christian Value

One of the primary tactics the Bush administration and his republican allies use to try and bolster their diminishing support is fear. They want us to believe that any policy that disagrees with what they want to do will open the door for another major terrorist attack.

The religious right is taking that cue in their latest campaign to portray their ilk as victims whose right to preach the gospel is being threatened. Tony Perkins, head of the right-wing Family Research Council, used Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich's removal of a member of the Washington area transit board for calling homosexuals "persons of sexual deviancy" as a prime example of this.

As usual, one can not objectively connect the dots in these folks' logic. The board member was a public servant, not a preacher standing at a pulpit. Any rational person knows a public official should not discriminate against any group of people he serves.

I will admit that I have seen some isolated cases where the interpretation of "hate speech" in a worship environment has been stretched further than I would take it, but this is still a very lame basis to strike fear into the hearts of right-wing voters. Anyone who claims that individuals' right to preach the gospel is only manipulating people by twisting and distorting facts.

Those are Christian values either.

"View of God can predict values, politics"

This story in the USA Today analyzes the early findings in one of the more thorough surveys about religious attitudes and values in the United States in recent memory.

I strongly recommend reading the entire article, but there are some points I want to highlight:

"Sociologist Paul Froese says the survey finds the stereotype that conservatives are religious and liberals are secular is "simply not true. Political liberals and conservative are both religious. They just have different religious views."

"Evangelical" may be losing favor as a way Americans describe themselves. About one in three Americans say they belong to denominations that theologians consider evangelical, but only 14% of all respondents in the survey say this is one way they would describe themselves. Only 2.2% called it the single best term. Top choices overall: "Bible-believing" (20.5%) or "born-again" (18.6%)."

The data shook out most view of God into one of four categories; The Authoritarian God, The Benevolent God, The Critical God, and The Distant God. The articles explains these groupings in some detail. Interestingly, "Those who picture a critical God are significantly less likely to draw absolute moral lines on hot-button issues such as abortion, gay marriage or embryonic stem cell research. For example, 57% overall say gay marriage is always wrong compared with 80.6% for those who see an authoritarian God, and 65.8% for those who see God as benevolent. For those who believe in a critical God, it was 54.7%."

More than one way to view a God--what an interesting concept. That would make it hard to legislate more than the most basic Christian values, wouldn't it, since there is so much disagreement about the very nature of God?

Reasonable minds would think so.

Majority Rule is not Always Right

I saw the latest poll on the constitutional amendment on the ballot in Virginia that would ban same-sex marriage (54% for, 40% against, no surprise there) and started thinking.

One of the main selling points those who seek to eliminate any chance of legally recoginzed marriage between people of the same gender is that the majority of the population does not want it. Unlike much of the propaganda put out by the religious right, this statement appears to be true. Voters in 20 states have already ratified similar amendments and several more likely will in November.

That doesn't mean they're right. The right wing uses the "voice of the people" when it supports their policies, but ignores the majority when they are looking the other way, such as the war in Iraq. A popularity contest is not by itself a legitimate value judgement. That's why it is important for those who believe in equality not to give up the fight.

After all, the final call on Jesus' crucifixion was the crowd who called for Pontius Pilate to release Barabbas, in jail for murder, rather than Jesus.

The majority, or sometimes the mob, may rule, but it often misses the mark, seeking its own will rather than that of Jesus.

WHOSOEVER: No more enemies

Anyone can return hate for hate, sarcasm for sarcasm, bitterness for bitterness, and ignorance for ignorance. But, if we are in Christ we have been called to a higher walk. We are beloved children of the Almighty God and Christ's Ambassadors. We are held to a higher accountability.

'And Jesus said, "You have heard it said to love your neighbor and hate your enemy, but I tell you to love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may indeed be the true sons and daughters of your Father in heaven." Matthew 5:43-45 NKJV.

We have been called to be light in a dark world, the reflection of God's love. We are commanded to love the unlovable, forgive, and pray for those that hurt and persecute us; doing good to those who hate us. This is the higher calling. This is real love. This is how we prove that we are true sons and daughters of God.

The by product of living life this way is that, eventually, we live free of all enemies.

What We Lost on 9/11

The five-year anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks is upon us, and I spent some time this weekend not only reflecting on the fear I had that day but how our lives and our nation has changed since then.

We now live in a nation that is governed by fear. I drive to work every day and see a sign over the interstate telling me to "report any suspicious activity."

We now live in a nation where we are constantly reminded that we are at war. Of course, the nation our troops invaded didn't have anything to do with the attacks that formalized this war and the resources spread paper-thin to fight that conflict are not available to deal with Iran, North Korea, or any other nation that is a geunine threat to our security.

We now live in a nation where dissent or debate that takes a side not in agreement with the current administration is labeled unpatriotic at best, treasonous at worst.

We now live in a nation where God's name is invoked as justification for features of Republican party policies that include bigotry and the consolidation of wealth among rich Republicans.

We now live in a nation where the leaders, both in the political and religious areneas, don't have answers for most of the serious issues facing it's people, like poverty, social security, the price and availability of energy, and global warming. As a result, efforts that should be spent there are diverted to things like preventing same-sex marriage, pushing for prayer in schools, and banning flag burning.

We now live in a nation where torture, indefinite detention of suspects, wiretapping without a warrant, and examination of telephone records are justifited and rationalized, not condemned as something out of a George Orwell novel.

Aren't the major goals of terrorist groups to promote fear and disrupt our society?

Sadly, their efforts are not needed. We've allowed our "leaders" to do that on their own initiative.