The Top Ten Religious Right Power Brokers

If you visit this blog regularly (thanks if you do), you notice I don't go very long without writing about one of what I think of as the "unholy trinity," Pat Robertson, James Dobson, and Jerry Falwell. There are times I wonder if I actually do focus on these men and their organizations too much, but then I see something like this, a listing of the top Religious Right power brokers.

Those three men account for six positions on the top ten as ranked by Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network is #1 and his American Center for Law and Justice is #6. Dobson's Focus on the Family is #2 and his Family Research Council is #7. He was also one of the founders of the #4 ranked Alliance Defense Fund. Falwell's ministry is ranked #8 and one of my other favorite targets, the American Family Association, is ranked #5.

It strikes me that the top ten organizations, which were ranked according to reported 2005 income, accounted for nearly $450 million combined. That kind of money will buy a lot of broadcast time, print a lot of books and pamphlets, and hold a lot of conferences.

There is a good summary of each organization in the report I link to, including James Kennedy's Coral Ridge Ministries (#3), Concerned Women for America (#9), and the Traditional Values Coalition (#10).

Tim and Beverly LaHaye founded the CWA, but LaHaye is probably better know for his "Left Behind" series of novels and the growing media empire based on them. Tim LaHaye used to be an associate pastor at a church I belonged to in the late 1980's--Montrose Baptist Church in Rockville, Maryland. He was a dynamic preacher, but needless to say my view of life and Christ have grown since then. LaHaye's bank account has grown dramatically during that time too.

BTW, did you know that all you homosexual activists have Mao Tse Tung as your hero? The Rev. Louis Sheldon, founder of the Traditional Values Coalition, does. Can he really believe all of the crap he says?

Typical Religious Right Rhetoric

Dr. Jerry Falwell was celebrating the ruling against same-sex marriage in New York in his most recent weekly e-mail message. To sum things up, he wrote this:

"But I have a question: if “every couple in a loving and committed relationship” should be afforded the right to marry, then do we not need to also allow bigamists, polygamists, Man-Boy Love Association members and all others in “alternative” relationships to marry? And if we do not afford them the same right, who are we to bar their inclusion into a diverse society? Of course, this is a nonsensical argument, but no more so than the attempt by homosexuals to gain the right to marry"

Isn't that typical. When you can't win a logical or intellectual arguement, you try to reach into the raw, base instincts of people. You try to promulgate fear, even if the assertions you use to do so are not based in fact. It doesn't matter if that is actually the nonsensical arguement itself as long as it makes people afraid and, out of that fear, they act the way you want them to. That is often the policy of the Republican Party in this country just as it is the Religious Right (often the standard bearers for the Republicans; or is the other way around? It's hard to tell anymore).

As effective as this approach is, just imagine if that's how Jesus had presented the gospel to people. Think how many more people would have accepted Him.

Think of how that would have diminished Christianity.

Look at how these modern day fearmongers diminish Christianity. Fortunately, they can't diminish Jesus.

A Very Personal Struggle

My fellow blogger Peterson Toscano is sharing the struggle his friend Marvin is going through with his sexuality. Marvin has reached the point where he is moving to Memphis so he can attend Love In Action, one of the more notorious ex-gay groups.

Marvin has contriubted a number of audio blog posts giving some insight to what is going on in his heart and mind as he moves toward this crossroads in his life. Peterson wrote what I felt is a warm, loving letter of encouragement to him, sharing his own experneices in an ex-gay camp.

I share this with you because, if you are interested in what leads someone to submit themselves to the ex-gay treatment, this series of posts will certainly shed some light on it.

NY Court Rules Against Gay Marriage

The supporters of equal rights for the GLBT coummunity lost a round in that ongoing battle today when the New York Court of Appeals ruled that same-sex marriage is not allowed under state law. The opinion was written by Judge Robert Smith. In it, he wrote "We do not predict what people will think generations from now, but we believe the present generation should have a chance to decide the issue through its elected representatives."

I can't help but wonder if all the rhetoric put out in the public domain by right-wing opponents of same-sex marriage about "activist judges" may have affected one or two of the votes on the court, which voted 4-2 on this ruling. In dissenting, Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye wrote, "I am confident that future generations will look back on today’s decision as an unfortunate misstep.”

Alan Van Capelle, Executive Director of Empire State Pride Agenda, responded to the ruling with this challenge, "Today's decision is far from the end of the battle for New York's lesbian and gay families. The Court has had its say, and now it is time for our elected officials to stand against discrimination and support marriage equality. Today, the Pride Agenda begins a campaign to press Albany to pass a marriage bill in 2007. For two years, legislators have waited for the Court to rule on this issue. It's now time for Albany to lead."

Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese was resolute, "“Every couple in a loving and committed relationship should be able to obtain the legal protections that only come with marriage. We know that the struggle for equality is never quick or easy, but history has taught us that with determination, debate and devotion — the side of progress ultimately prevails. We will continue to move forward.”

Matt Foreman, Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, lashed out at the court, “Today’s tortured and intellectually strained decision is beyond disappointing. It is insulting to gay and lesbian people and our families. It is an egregious departure from the New York Court of Appeals’ long and proud tradition of advancing liberty and dismantling discrimination. It is a disgrace to the constitution and the people of New York.'

The Family Research Council's Vice President for Policy, Peter Sprigg, on the other hand, was feeling rather chipper, "The New York court reasonably concluded that the legislature has a legitimate interest in promoting responsible procreation and can 'rationally' believe that children need both a mother and a father. The court's well-reasoned ruling is a shining example for other courts across the nation. As we await rulings in several other states, we can only hope that other courts will exercise similar judicial restraint and avoid substituting their own social policy preferences for those of the legislatures and the people."

American Family Association Center for Law and Policy chief counsel Steve Crampton sees the decision as a "major blow” to the “radical homosexual effort to reconstitute the moral framework of our nation.” He added, "“For years the homosexuals have used the courts to get what they could never get through the democratic process; in New York, at least, they will have to seek change the old-fashioned way.”

Remember, courts that agree with the right wing are good, those who disagree are radical activists. Or are the radical activists on the right wing side and courts who disagree with them concerned about equality and fairness? Sadly, I could probably quote the response to that question from each of the officials I quoted here nearly verbatim.

"Vote for Jesus"

Given that today is Independence Day in the United States (for those of you who saw the movie, it's always a bit of a relief when another one goes by without alien attack) I thought linking to this column was appropriate.

The writer, a Baptist pastor in Alabama whom I have linked to before, talks about how Jesus and faith are now tools to be used by politicians, especially when their poll numbers need a bump.

Mr. Evans writes:

"With the Marriage Protection amendment to the Alabama state constitution, marriages in our state are now secure from the ravages of the so-called "gay agenda." We haven't figured out yet how to save marriage from what actually threatens marriage—I guess that will require yet another amendment in some future campaign."

"I wish more candidates in political races would invoke the name of Jesus by championing the causes he cared about most."

".....there is a danger, from all segments of the political spectrum, of so politicizing Jesus that we empty him of his true significance in our lives."

There is wisdom here for candidates and voters regardless of political party affiliation.

Sports: Times are a Changing

I ran across this interesting feature in the New York Daily News that chronicles several items regarding the place of homosexuality in the sports world.

The article was motivated by the passive denial by New York Giants' defensive end Michael Strachan to accusations by his soon-to-be ex-wife that he was having a romantic relationship with another man. They compared this to New York Mets' star cather Mike Piazza calling a press conference to deny that he was gay.

The piece also talks about the head lacrosse coach at the University of Missouri. He recently came out, and the school responded by offering to extend his contract. His players, at least initially, weren't too thrilled with it and the coach, Kyle Hawkins, is still considering whether he will stay at the school.

There is also a summary of the history of "the gay issue" in sports.

The piece also references a site called Out Sports, which is the best site I have found covering gays and sports. If that is something you might be interested in, I recommend you check it out.

"Progress on gay rights leaves politicians in the dust"

That's the title of this essay by Joe Solmonese, the president of the Human Rights Campaign. He points out that for the first time, a majority of Fortune 500 companies are now offering domestic partner health insurance benefits to their employees. Here are some excerpts:

"The private sector continues to be far ahead of the political debate. While elected officials continue to dwell on the "politics" of equal protections and rights, business leaders are encouraging fairness for their employees."

"America's workplaces and schools are a microcosm of the country. They are places where people from different walks of life -- all religions, races, income levels, sexual orientations and gender identities -- are thrown together and told to make it work. They're doing just that and these policies and benefits are helping employers and employees succeed."

"Unfortunately, many political leaders are far behind business leaders in promoting and implementing fair and equitable policies for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans. Sadly, we see some politicians attacking our families and exploiting anti-gay prejudice for political purposes -- which results in fueling that prejudice and dividing our country."

The comments posted on this piece are also worth reading and span a wide range of viewpoints.

Gazette Column on Gays Called Vile, Hateful, Ill-informed"

Earlier this week, I commented on a column in the local (for me) Montgomery County, Maryland Gazette newspaper where their political columnist, Blair Lee, compared gays to pedophiles and serial killers. I expressed my outrage and I had plenty of company doing so. I directed my thoughts to Mr. Lee (I have not received a reply), but plenty of Gazette readers contacted the paper to express their outrage.

Here are a few I found particularly interesting:

"Just what is it about gays and lesbians that threaten Mr. Lee so much?"

"His ill-informed, ignorant, bigoted rants are an exact equivalent to the cases he makes about hostile speech directed at women and blacks. It is pitiful that he does not realize or understand the comparisons."

"As most extremists do, Mr. Lee excuses his condemnation and vilification of a group of American citizens by wrapping his argument up in religion. If it’s about religion, it can’t possibly be bigotry, hatred or discrimination, can it? "

"If such a vicious piece were written about any other minority group, would they be published?"

There are many more good thoughts the Gazette posted that are worth taking the time to read.

Know That You Can Hear the Call of God

In my latest essay for Gay Christian Outreach, I use the scripture of 1 Samuel 3:2-10 as my text to show how ALL of us can hear the call of God.

Dobson: Media Provides Cover For Assault on Traditional Marriage

Dr. James Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family and an arch-enemy of GLBT equality, has written an essay that was posted on CNN.com.

There is actually one point where I agree with Dr. Dobson. He referred here to the recent vote in the U. S. Senate that failed to bring the Marriage Protection Act to the floor:

"As for the senators who voted against the amendment, the excuses they gave were pitiful. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-Rhode Island, Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire, and many others thought they had the perfect alibi. They claimed that the issue should be handled at the state level. What hypocrisy!

All of these senators are smart enough to know that, first, it would create utter chaos to have 50 different definitions of marriage in one country, where every state is required by the Constitution to support the laws of the other 49. Come on, Senator McCain and company. You and your colleagues know better than that."

I totally agree with that point. If same-sex marriage is okay in Massachusetts, it should be okay in Texas. Expousing states rights is often congressional code for not having enough guts to take a stand on an issue.

Most of Dr. Dosbon's justification for prohibiting same-sex marriage is public opinion polls. If we allowed all of society's issues to be decided by a public vote, I doubt we would like the results. For example, there would probably still be slaves in the south and women would not have the right to vote, or many rights at all. I'm also very confident that Dr. Dobson won't feel the same way when opinion polls shift in favor of same-sex marriage, but by then he'll blame the media, as he does here for the Senate vote.

Dobson and others of his ilk keep talking about the "destruction" or "weakening" of the institution of marriage if men are allowed to marry other men, or women marrying other women, but they seldom if ever tell us why. If two gay men having the right to marry weakens my marriage to Brenda, that would say a lot more about the weak foundation our marriage had than it would the gay men.

CNN.com also posted some comments to Dobson's article. As usual in public forums, the most thoughtful responses came from those who favor same-sex marriage. This again, in my opinion, shows just how little substance there is to the arguement against other than quoting tradition.

Of course, Dr. Dobson would probably find a way to blame the media for that too.

Responding to Stupdity and/or Bigotry

The good folks at Equality Maryland alerted me to this column written in the local Montgomery County, Maryland Gazette newspaper.

The writer, Blair Lee, is a longtime pundit on area politics. He was upset about Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich removing Robert Smith from the local Metro transportation board because he referred to homosexuality as "deviant behavior" based on his Catholic faith.

Lee believed this was simply a case of opportunistic Democrats trying to cause trouble for a Republican governor who is up for reelection, and he is certainly entitled to that opinion. He is not entitled to this one, however:

"But the homosexual lobby is desperately and relentlessly trying to parlay the public’s tolerance into the acceptance of homosexuality as normal. After all, if God made homosexuals then homosexuality must be normal, right? Sorry, just because God created you doesn’t mean you’re normal. God created pedophiles and serial killers, too."

I expressed my outrage at this statement directly to Mr. Lee, and I'm publishing that e-mail here:

Dear Mr. Lee,

I have read your columns over the years in the various newspapers where they have appeared and respect your take on local politics. Even when I have disagreed with you views, I found them to be clearly stated and well supported.

Unfortunately, in your 6/23 column in the Gazette, you strayed from your area of expertise and showed ignorance at best, intolerance and bigotry at worst. You wrote:

But the homosexual lobby is desperately and relentlessly trying to parlay the public’s tolerance into the acceptance of homosexuality as normal. After all, if God made homosexuals then homosexuality must be normal, right? Sorry, just because God created you doesn’t mean you’re normal. God created pedophiles and serial killers, too.

Comparing homosexuals' place in society to pedophiles and serial killers is offensive and repugnant. I happen to be straight myself, but my brother and several members of my church family who I love very much are homosexual. I deeply resent you grouping these wonderful people in with murders.

Just so you know, many of the "perponderance of American religions" you refer to once treated women and blacks as lesser citizens. They grew beyond that as hopefully they will grow beyond their condemnation of homosexuality today.

I hope you show better judgement in your future columns and stick to politics. Leave the larger issues to those who have a grasp on reality.

Jim Johnson
www.straightnotnarrow.org

I encourage anyone who reads the column and agrees with me to send Mr. Lee an e-mail. His address is at the bottom of the page.

BBC: Do You Have the Right to Be Gay?

Thanks to PageOne Q, I saw this posted on the BBC (British Broadcasting Corp) website. Some Nigerians living in London were hosting an international day of prayer in support of gay and lesbian people living in Nigeria. Motivated by this, the BBC posed the question, "Do You Have the Right to Be Gay?"

An interesting cross-section of people responded with the predictable mix of answers. Here are a couple that I thought were noteworthy:

People (whether heterosexual, homosexual or asexual) should exhibit their sexuality (or lack of it) within their bedrooms. By the same token, governments have no business peering into people's bedrooms. However, there should be zero tolerance for discrimination when a person's sexuality becomes public knowledge, for whatever reason. Governments, particularly those in Africa, have more pressing problems, e.g., healthcare and poverty reduction.
Akpan, Kent, UK/Nigeria

Of course people have a right to be gay. It is a basic matter of respect for the individual. Those who would stop homosexuality or punish gays, anywhere in the world, are simply evil. We must not compromise, or allow for cultural relativity. That would be as bad as compromising with Al-Quaeda.
Richard, London, UK

I am an African lesbian. My sexual orientation is me, how can there be any debate about whether I have a right to be what I am? Heterosexual Africans should wake up to the truth.
Chris Smith,

Then, from the other side.....

The culture of Africa forbids same sex marriage. The fact that it is practised in other continents does not make it right. Africans, let's respect and defend our culture.
Daniel Bassah, Accra - Ghana

The bible says that it is an abomination. It is a dirty game. It is dangerous to humankind. The first time I saw a man kissing another man on Tv, I vomited the whole day.
rickie89, USA

Anyone has a right to be gay, lesbian or even bisexual. It's based on individual preference. What bothers me about the whole ordeal is the gay and lesbian community's eagerness at shoving their adopted lifestyles down our throats. Homosexuality and lesbianism shouldn't be gathering as much momentum as the media has accorded them.
Lara Ladejobi, USA

The debate goes on worldwide.

Not Everybody Loves a Parade

I love my satellite radios (yes, I have BOTH XM and Sirius, what a radio whore I am), but occasionally some really aggravating noise comes out of it. That happened today, when I was surfing and ran across Fox Talk Radio.

The host was someone named Spencer Hayes, who was substituting for John Gibson. He was sharing the trauma he experienced this past weekend when he saw part of the Gay Pride parade in San Francisco. He kept going on about how he had to cover his five-year old son’s eyes because of, among other things, someone dressed as a dancing vagina.

The point Hayes was trying to make was how he felt “displays” like that set gay rights back 20, 30, even 50 years. He claimed to be a supporter of gay rights, at least before this weekend, but he made two statements that clearly exposed his prejudice to the contrary.

First, he questioned why anyone would be proud of being gay and need a day to express it. After all, he reasoned, he didn’t wake up every morning bursting with pride about being heterosexual. Of course, he probably never had anyone call him a sinner destined for hell because he was hetero. Hayes has probably never had political campaigns designed to limit his civil rights or restrict his rights to marry the person he loves. If so, he would probably have understood how important it is to the gay community to express pride in who they are despite what many of them have been told all of their lives.

I called in to the show and was put on the air, where the host again showed how oblivious he was to anything relating to GLBT people. I made the point that the exhibitionists at the Gay Pride parade weren’t any more representative of the gay community than Mardi Gras was of heterosexuals. I felt he was holding all gay people accountable for the actions of a few, which I equated to my having to answer for the debauchery in New Orleans. I also reminded the host that there was no more such thing as the “homosexual lifestyle” as there was a “heterosexual lifestyle.”

Hayes said that all you see at Mardi Gras was some girls lifting up their shirts and exposing their breasts while at the parade he saw two men wearing tutus, which was clearly worse. What! The only difference is, I suppose, is that he likes women’s breasts but doesn’t much care for men in tutus.

The worst part of Mr. Hayes’ ranting is that he was not entirely wrong. There are plenty of people who use events like the Pride parades and the exhibitionists who practice outrageous behavior in them to discredit the entire homosexual community. When a minority movement is trying to improve its traction, activities that strongly alienate a sector of their target demographic are not helpful.

Clearly, some of the participants in these events aren’t worried about anybody’s rights except their own opportunity to act out in whatever way pleases them. Unfortunately, behavior like this is not limited to any specific sexual orientation.

Muslim Gays Seek Lesbians For Wives

Apparently Christians aren't the only ones who feel pushed into marriage to hide their homosexuality. According to this article from the Washington Post, this is also a trend among Muslims, even those in the United States.

"Marriages of convenience are the result of gay Muslims wanting to avoid emotional and physical harm to themselves," says Muhammed Ali, a board member of Homan, a Los Angeles-based support group for gay Iranians.

Yes, there is a support group for gay Iranians. I bet you didn't know that, did you?

The article states, "Homosexuality is a crime punishable by death in much of the Islamic world. In Iran last year, two gay teenagers were publicly executed, while in Afghanistan, the Taliban government would torture homosexuals by collapsing walls on them. Though gay Muslims in America don't have such fears, they still seek out marriages of convenience as a way of staying in the closet. Many of them worry about being ostracized from their families if their secret is revealed."

Here is a quote for you, "Homosexuality is a moral disorder. It is a moral disease, a sin and corruption. . . . No person is born homosexual, just like no one is born a thief, a liar or murderer," he said. "People acquire these evil habits due to a lack of proper guidance and education."

No, that's not James Dobson or Pat Robertson talking. The quote came from Muzammil Siddiqi of the Islamic Society of North America.

I wonder if Dobson can line up Siddiqi for his next "Love Won Out" conference?

GLBT Sensitivity Creeping Into the Sports World

Ozzie Guillen, the manager of baseball's Chicago White Sox, got himself into some hot water this week. Guillen, who led the White Sox to the World Series championship last season, has proven to be a goldmine for reporters looking for quotes because he'll say just about anything regarding just about any topic. It was a comment he made to one of those sportswriters that has caused Guillen to get into trouble.

In a fit of anger last Tuesday night, he called Jay Mariotti, long-time sports columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times, a "fag." I find it interesting that the reaction has been swift and fairly harsh toward Guillen. He has been fined by baseball Commisioner Bud Selig and ordered to take sensitivity training. Guillen was also suspended for one game. According to 365gay.com, this was not Guillen's first time throwing around that particular "f" word

In a statement, Selig said, "Ozzie Guillen used language that is offensive and completely unacceptable. Baseball is a social institution with responsibility to set appropriate tone and example. Conduct or language that reflects otherwise will not be tolerated. The use of slurs embarrasses the individual, the club and the game." Good stuff from a "leader" who often can't get out of his own way.

Later comments from Guillen show his resistance toward taking any sensitivity training, blaming the outrage on the allegedly different meaning of the word fag in his native Venezuela (coward instead of homosexual). He also gives a laughable explanation of why he does not hate gays, stating that goes to WNBA games, has attended a Madona concert, and plans on attending the upcoming Gay Games in Chicago.

Whatever. I know most of the readers here don't give a rat's tushie about Ozzie Guillen or the Chicago White Sox. I tell this story, however, to point out that mindsets are changing toward acceptence of GLBT people, even in the testosterone-laden world of professional sports. There's a long, long way to go, but the needle is slowly moving in the right direction.

Do You Want Your Lesiglator to Preach?

Think about that question. How comfortable would you be if someone representing you in either your local or the federal legislature stood up at the microphone and started preaching the Gospel of Jesus? What if he wrote a devotional in his newsletter originating from the state or U. S. Capitol? Even if you agree with what was said, I suspect most of you would share the same type of discomfort I would feel.

Let's flip that scenario around. Why is it then okay for church officials to push for specific legislation from the pulpit and/or in their church's newsletters? I don't think it is okay, yet the most recent example of that is occurring right now in Colorado.

According to this report on 365gay.com, Roman Catholic churches throughout Colorado will be working to collect signiatures for two ballot measures, one that would restrict the rights of same-sex couples, the other that would amend the state Constitution and ban same-sex marriage.

My point here is not to adress the speficic initiatives, but rather condemn the Catholic Church in that area for stooping to the level of a political operative. I understand their position on these measures are consistent with the teachings of the church. I respect their right to share that view from the pulpit in the same way that they would preach about various sins that we can all agree about, such as violence and adultery. Adressing the fact that there are almost certainly some closeted gay priests doing the church's bidding here is another issue.

I don't want to see any political initiative debated from the pulpit of my church, even if it is one that would favor the GLBT population that largely makes up our congregation.

Let the politicians and political organizations stick to lobbying for political issues (and hopefully staying away from preaching). I want pastors, priests, and anyone else standing behind a pulpit claiming to represent Jesus Christ's church would stick to that and not try to run a political campaign.

I attend church to worship God, not take sides on political issues. I wish everyone else took the same approach.

Don't Waste Time With Stereotypes

It’s easy for people to pick up a few characteristics about someone and categorize them into a stereotype.

For example, allow me to describe some traits and qualities of a man I know:

Likes romantic comedies
Enjoys snuggling
Has written poetry
Has platonic women friends
Cries openly, both out of sadness and joy
Doesn’t like working on cars or using tools
Is comfortable being a passenger in a car with a woman driving
Expresses his feelings without a gun pointed at his head or other threats
Has a gay brother and gay friends
Enjoys musicals
Enjoys decorating his home

Here are characteristics of another man I know:

Loves sports
Enjoys sex with his wife
Takes out the trash every weekend
Does work around the home that requires heavy lifting
Is an assertive leader
Sneaks a peek at other women when his wife isn’t looking
Doesn’t get the iconic status of Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz
Enjoys science fiction and super hero movies
Has been “the provider” for most of his adult life
Did I mention he really enjoys sex with his wife?

Now let’s slot these into stereotypes. The first person is gay and the second is clearly a flaming heterosexual, right? Yes and no.

If the first person was gay, my wife would have some issues to deal with because I was describing myself. I’d also have to change the name of this blog, wouldn’t I?

I don’t have to worry about that however, because the second group of personality traits also describes me. My new friend Dennis, who recently began attending our church, says he believes everyone has some parts of being both straight and gay as part of their nature. If we limit our perspective to those classifications, I believe he is absolutely right and I put myself out there as an example of the truth in that.

Why have we fallen into the trap of trying to fit everyone into a slot? If we go back to the example of Jesus, we can see that he clearly did not do that. He ministered to sinners, Jew or Gentile, rich or poor, man or woman. He still does. Paul also shared some inspired wisdom in Galatians 3:26-29:

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

That’s the only category we need to worry about fitting into.

Pentagon: Don't Ask, Don't Tell, They're Nuts

That's only a slight exaggeration according to this AP report. Astonishingly, a Pentagon document has been uncovered that classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder. This is contrary to the findings of a group that is probably better qualified to make that judgement, the American Psychiatric Association. That organization dropped homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973. In fact, they issued a press relase today asking the Pentagon to update this instruction.

Along with their "don't ask, don't tell" policy, it is painfully obvious the Pentagon don't get it.

Happy Birthday to This Blog

One year ago today, I made my first entry in this blog. I had no idea if anyone would read it or, if they did, care about what I wrote. All I knew was that I had something to say. A year later, Straight Not Narrow has been visited over 13,000 times, almost 7,500 of them within the last three months. People from 84 different nations have found this tiny corner of the blogosphere, and over 100 sites are linked to this blog.

Most importantly, many of the visitors here have contributed to the discussion of important issues or spiritual topics. I frequently think that the comments are better that what I write, and that’s fine with me. I’ve learned a lot over the past year…..

I’ve learned that there are many people in the GLBT community that are deeply, deeply wounded. Sadly, much of that pain has been administered by their families, both biological and within the church, often in the name of love.

I’ve learned there are a lot of people with a lot of money that will do or say ANYTHING to influence people to hate homosexuals as much as they do.

I’ve seen the Holy Spirit manifest in gay and lesbian women. I know for a fact that anyone who says that is not possible is wrong.

I have been reminded that there are few politicians who have the courage to take a stand that might not be to their direct political benefit.

I have learned that there are no limits to how much Jesus loves ALL his people and wants to bless us. If we don’t feel that in our lives, we are the one limiting Him.

I have seen things said and done in the name of God that I cannot imagine he is remotely connected with.

I have experienced a great enrichment in my life by getting to know and love gay and lesbian leaders and members of my church. I also treasure their love for me.

I have seen the power of people with different gifts and different perspectives getting together to work for a cause they all believe in.

I have learned that I still have a lot to learn about the GLBT community, but that it’s worth the effort.

I hope you will help me, or allow me to help you, work for GLBT equality in the political arena and Christ’s church in the next year and beyond.

Comparing Notes

I've signed to receive e-mail notices from a number of organizations, some on the political left, others on the political right. It's interesting to compare notes when more than one of them send a release on the same news item.

That heppened this week regarding comments made by a Washington DC Metro Board Member Robert J. Smith. Metro is the transportation system, including subway and buses, that serves DC, Virginia, and Maryland. The three juristrictions share the cost and governing of the system, and Smith was appointed to the board by the governor of Maryland, Robert Ehrlich.

For reasons that escape me, Smith was on a Montgomery County (Maryland) cable show and said, "Homosexual behavior, in my opinion, is deviant. I'm a Roman Catholic."

Frankly, I don't really care what a transportation official believes about homosexuality, but a public official making this kind of remarks on television, even local cable, is newsworthy.

On Friday, Governor Ehrlich responded to the situation by removing Smith from the board.

That action prompted two press releases I received in my e-mail.

The first, from Equality Maryland, said:

“All fair-minded Marylanders should appreciate the action taken by Governor Ehrlich in swiftly and seriously addressing these repugnant comments by his appointee. It is good that he recognized that such hostile and hateful comments about any group of people makes him inappropriate for public service,” said Dan Furmansky, Executive Director of Equality Maryland.
According to a statement released by Governor Ehlrich, “Robert Smith’s comments were highly inappropriate, insensitive and unacceptable. They are in direct conflict to my administration’s commitment to inclusion, tolerance and opportunity."

Later, the American Family Association sent out a press release titled, "'Tolerant' Governor fires 'Intolerant' Christian.

"Gov. Ehrlich said he is intolerant to any view that opposes the full social acceptance of homosexual behavior and its promotion in government. He said Smith's comments were "highly inappropriate, insensitive and unacceptable. They are in direct conflict to my administration's commitment to...tolerance." Gov. Ehrlich contradicted his own statement! He is promoting tolerance toward homosexual practice while being intolerant to Smith's Christian beliefs and the teaching of his church. "

The AFA release continued, "Smith was fired not because he wasn't doing a good job. He was fired not because of his practice, but because of his thinking! He was fired because he held different beliefs. So much for tolerance! If this firing stands, it means that any Christian who states publicly that homosexual practice is morally wrong does so at the risk of being fired. "

The AFA loves for people to send e-mail to people the organization think has done something wrong, so they were nice enough to include the governor's e-mail address.

My position is to agree with Equality Maryland. Even if someone is just responsible for running the trains and buses, he should not be on the public record condemning any part of the general population.

The AFA used a common tactic of the religious right by making their side look like the victim. It's okay to condemn people publicly, in their slanted view, but wrong to hold them accountable.

Then again, the religious right isn't good at holding themselves accountable, just others.