Florida state representative Bob Allen has been charged with soliciting a male undercover policeman and lamely claims it happened because he was scared.
In a taped statement and other documents released last week, Allen, 48, told police that he was intimidated into offering sex.
"I certainly wasn't there to have sex with anybody and certainly wasn't there to exchange money for it," the Sentinel quoted him as saying.
Rather, he said, "this was a pretty stocky black guy, and there was nothing but other black guys around in the park," Allen said. He said he feared he "was about to be a statistic."
Titusville police told the Sentinel that they were investigating a nearby condo burglary when they saw a disheveled, unshaved man enter and leave the park restroom three times. They decided to send in Officer Danny Kavanaugh.
In a statement Kavanaugh said he was drying his hands in a stall when Allen peered—twice—over the stall door, then joined Kavanaugh inside.
"This is kind of a public place, isn't it?" Kavanaugh quoted Allen as saying, according to the Sentinel. Allen then suggested "going across the bridge; it's quieter over there."
Yeah, that's just what I would do. If I was intimidated because I was surrounded by large African-American men, the first thing I would do is offer to have sex with them. What straight man wouldn't do that?
It's one thing for someone to do something stupid, but it's even worse when he comes up with some pitiful excuse and insults everyone's intelligence in the process.
Of course, it goes without saying that he had a strong anti-gay record in the Florida legislature.
I pity someone like Rep. Allen who apparently can't be honest about, or with, themselves, but I feel even sorrier for the people he is supposed to represent.
Especially if they happen to be gay.
August 07, 2007
August 06, 2007
The Winner in Thursday Night's Debate? The GLBT Community
This article on The Huffington Post points out that what is said during Thursday night's Democratic presidential debate on the LOGO network is not nearly as important as the fact that all the candidates will be there saying it.
What's important about the Human Rights Campaign-sponsored debate is its mere occurrence. If the Dems are confident enough to tackle gay issues head-on for a full hour, it means they're no longer worried that the Republicans will throw it back in their faces. They're not afraid, and more importantly, they're betting voters aren't afraid either.
During the 2004 presidential elections George Bush was able to make a lot of headway by scaring moderate voters with the twin specters of activist judges and the impending doom of traditional marriage. The Massachusetts Supreme Court gay marriage ruling had just been handed down, and Bush, eyeing re-election, called it "arbitrary" and "undermining" to families. Nobody knew what might happen if gay partnerships were made legal -- and Republicans worked to make this unknown quantity as frightening as possible.
As real-life experiments with equal gay rights are carried out federally and locally all over the world, the GOP can no longer count on the issue to scare voters to the ballot box. It may be that the long-term results in those places are not what gay activists would hope for, but in the short term, growing familiarity with the issue is working in their favor. The Democratic presidential candidates, sensing this change, have come out of their shells to talk about the issue openly and comfortably. It will no longer be an ignored plank in their broad platforms, as it was in 2004 when John Kerry rarely addressed his support of civil unions until after Bush suggested a federal amendment banning same sex marriage.
This time around, the Democratic candidates have already been more vocal about their positions. During Thursday's HRC debate, nobody is likely to say anything shocking or new. But for supporters of gay rights and marriage equality, merely having a debate says it all.
Even four years ago, having this debate would have seemed farfetched. For people waiting year after year to gain equal rights, I understand why that may not seem like a big deal, but it is.
What's important about the Human Rights Campaign-sponsored debate is its mere occurrence. If the Dems are confident enough to tackle gay issues head-on for a full hour, it means they're no longer worried that the Republicans will throw it back in their faces. They're not afraid, and more importantly, they're betting voters aren't afraid either.
During the 2004 presidential elections George Bush was able to make a lot of headway by scaring moderate voters with the twin specters of activist judges and the impending doom of traditional marriage. The Massachusetts Supreme Court gay marriage ruling had just been handed down, and Bush, eyeing re-election, called it "arbitrary" and "undermining" to families. Nobody knew what might happen if gay partnerships were made legal -- and Republicans worked to make this unknown quantity as frightening as possible.
As real-life experiments with equal gay rights are carried out federally and locally all over the world, the GOP can no longer count on the issue to scare voters to the ballot box. It may be that the long-term results in those places are not what gay activists would hope for, but in the short term, growing familiarity with the issue is working in their favor. The Democratic presidential candidates, sensing this change, have come out of their shells to talk about the issue openly and comfortably. It will no longer be an ignored plank in their broad platforms, as it was in 2004 when John Kerry rarely addressed his support of civil unions until after Bush suggested a federal amendment banning same sex marriage.
This time around, the Democratic candidates have already been more vocal about their positions. During Thursday's HRC debate, nobody is likely to say anything shocking or new. But for supporters of gay rights and marriage equality, merely having a debate says it all.
Even four years ago, having this debate would have seemed farfetched. For people waiting year after year to gain equal rights, I understand why that may not seem like a big deal, but it is.
August 05, 2007
Verbally Abusing Gay People Un-American
If that sounds a bit extreme, check out this excerpt from an op-ed in the Kansas City Star:
People who direct this word disparagingly at someone else do so because they feel superior to that person. Whether it comes from their sense of morality, masculinity or some other reason, those who call other people “fags” feel justified because they believe their rights outweigh those of their victims.
We weren’t causing a disturbance. We weren’t breaking any laws. We were simply waiting to cross a street. Still, this stranger felt it was OK to verbally abuse us.
This smug supremacy over other people’s rights is evident in more than just calling someone a name. It’s noticeable in ongoing efforts to prevent gender and sexual orientation from being added as covered categories in the federal hate-crimes law, in discussions over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt and raise children, in limiting marriage rights to only heterosexual couples, and in allowing workplaces to dismiss employees because of their sexual orientation.
When America allows someone’s personal beliefs to reign over another’s, we have handcuffed our nation’s ability to grant freedoms.
Instead, we’re limiting them. Whether it’s the freedom to walk a sidewalk without fear of ridicule or the freedom to have you and your partner’s love legally recognized, it doesn’t matter.
What matters is that we as a nation must live up to the pledge to “promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” as written in our Constitution.
So the next time you consider the use of the three-letter f-word, remember that it’s more than just a word. It’s a reminder that some people think their rights cancel out someone else’s.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
People who direct this word disparagingly at someone else do so because they feel superior to that person. Whether it comes from their sense of morality, masculinity or some other reason, those who call other people “fags” feel justified because they believe their rights outweigh those of their victims.
We weren’t causing a disturbance. We weren’t breaking any laws. We were simply waiting to cross a street. Still, this stranger felt it was OK to verbally abuse us.
This smug supremacy over other people’s rights is evident in more than just calling someone a name. It’s noticeable in ongoing efforts to prevent gender and sexual orientation from being added as covered categories in the federal hate-crimes law, in discussions over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to adopt and raise children, in limiting marriage rights to only heterosexual couples, and in allowing workplaces to dismiss employees because of their sexual orientation.
When America allows someone’s personal beliefs to reign over another’s, we have handcuffed our nation’s ability to grant freedoms.
Instead, we’re limiting them. Whether it’s the freedom to walk a sidewalk without fear of ridicule or the freedom to have you and your partner’s love legally recognized, it doesn’t matter.
What matters is that we as a nation must live up to the pledge to “promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” as written in our Constitution.
So the next time you consider the use of the three-letter f-word, remember that it’s more than just a word. It’s a reminder that some people think their rights cancel out someone else’s.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
August 04, 2007
Positive Movement in Two Key States
I'm posting about two stories here that show where the battles for GLBT equality are really being fought; on a state-by-state level. In two of those states, California and Virginia, attitudes are changing and progress could be made.
The Bay Area Reporter tells us that there was some movement from Republicans in the California state legislature toward the direction of equal rights in this year's session.
A surprising change has occurred with Republican lawmakers during this year's legislative session in Sacramento. They are voicing less dissent to LGBT legislation, and some GOP members are casting "aye" votes when it comes to certain gay rights measures.
The actions of the minority party in the state Capitol have not gone unnoticed. Last week the Assembly passed on a 70-1 vote a resolution urging Congress and President Bush to pass LGBT-inclusive federal hates crimes legislation.
Immediately afterward, Equality California, the statewide LGBT advocacy group, noted in a press release that the resolution passed with "historic bipartisan support." Joining 46 Democrats were 24 Republicans in favor of the measure, the most bipartisan support ever received in the California Legislature for a measure affecting the LGBT community, according to EQCA.
Meanwhile, the Washington Blade reports that there is some hope for a breakthrough in Virginia, a staunchly anti-gay state:
It might take five years, but Virginia could eventually see its anti-gay marriage amendment modified to clear the way for domestic partnerships or civil unions, according to a speaker at a gay rights conference here last weekend.
David Lampo, vice president of the Log Cabin Republicans of Virginia, told the Blade that improving the climate in the state for gays can be done through individual bills in a piecemeal fashion.
“I think if we can do some of these issues a baby step at a time we should get them through,” he said. “It might take longer, but hopefully in five years we can get the marriage amendment modified and at least have domestic partnerships and civil unions so we’re not constitutionally prohibited like we are now.”
Lampo said there are plenty of interim measures that could advance gay rights in the notoriously anti-gay state. One strategy is to broaden support for gay issues by reaching out to different groups, especially those that would benefit from non-discrimination policies and domestic partnership benefits, especially universities.
“If we got that accomplished it will be a great boon,” he said.
The Log Cabin Republicans were also cited in the story about progress in the California GOP. A while back I asked how a gay person could be active in the Republican party, and I received some thoughtful responses that express the view that working for change from within was a viable option that could make a difference.
While I am still somewhat sceptical of that approach, these are two examples of where it might actually be working that way.
The Bay Area Reporter tells us that there was some movement from Republicans in the California state legislature toward the direction of equal rights in this year's session.
A surprising change has occurred with Republican lawmakers during this year's legislative session in Sacramento. They are voicing less dissent to LGBT legislation, and some GOP members are casting "aye" votes when it comes to certain gay rights measures.
The actions of the minority party in the state Capitol have not gone unnoticed. Last week the Assembly passed on a 70-1 vote a resolution urging Congress and President Bush to pass LGBT-inclusive federal hates crimes legislation.
Immediately afterward, Equality California, the statewide LGBT advocacy group, noted in a press release that the resolution passed with "historic bipartisan support." Joining 46 Democrats were 24 Republicans in favor of the measure, the most bipartisan support ever received in the California Legislature for a measure affecting the LGBT community, according to EQCA.
Meanwhile, the Washington Blade reports that there is some hope for a breakthrough in Virginia, a staunchly anti-gay state:
It might take five years, but Virginia could eventually see its anti-gay marriage amendment modified to clear the way for domestic partnerships or civil unions, according to a speaker at a gay rights conference here last weekend.
David Lampo, vice president of the Log Cabin Republicans of Virginia, told the Blade that improving the climate in the state for gays can be done through individual bills in a piecemeal fashion.
“I think if we can do some of these issues a baby step at a time we should get them through,” he said. “It might take longer, but hopefully in five years we can get the marriage amendment modified and at least have domestic partnerships and civil unions so we’re not constitutionally prohibited like we are now.”
Lampo said there are plenty of interim measures that could advance gay rights in the notoriously anti-gay state. One strategy is to broaden support for gay issues by reaching out to different groups, especially those that would benefit from non-discrimination policies and domestic partnership benefits, especially universities.
“If we got that accomplished it will be a great boon,” he said.
The Log Cabin Republicans were also cited in the story about progress in the California GOP. A while back I asked how a gay person could be active in the Republican party, and I received some thoughtful responses that express the view that working for change from within was a viable option that could make a difference.
While I am still somewhat sceptical of that approach, these are two examples of where it might actually be working that way.
August 03, 2007
Democratic Movement on Gay Rights
Yesterday I wrote about how viable Democratic (and, of course Republican) presidential candidates are sidestepping the issue of same-sex marriage. However, this article from The Politico (a political newspaper in Washington, DC) indicates that the Democrats are stepping up to the plate on other GLBT issues:
The Democrats' apparent newfound confidence on gay issues -- a confidence, to be fair, that hasn't yet been tested by general election pressures -- has two sources. There's a broad cultural shift, indicated by polling, toward public support for gay rights.
And the shift comes as Democrats feel confident that Republicans -- weakened and tied to an unpopular war in Iraq -- will be unable to turn gay rights into the high-profile wedge issue it was in 2004.
"It's a very different time four years later," said the president of Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solmonese, whose group also sponsored a debate in 2003 that was attended by all the leading candidates other than then-Sen. John Edwards.
"It's the American people and these candidates being in a more enlightened place on (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) issues. And it's an emboldened view that the electorate is not going to let this field stray away from what really matters to the American people."
It will be interesting to see how far the candidates will go during the HRC/Logo Network televised debate on Thursday, August 9th. It will be even more interesting to see, if one of them is elected, how they then back it up with action.
There is a spirited debate going on tagged to The Politico article that is worth checking out and participating in.
The Democrats' apparent newfound confidence on gay issues -- a confidence, to be fair, that hasn't yet been tested by general election pressures -- has two sources. There's a broad cultural shift, indicated by polling, toward public support for gay rights.
And the shift comes as Democrats feel confident that Republicans -- weakened and tied to an unpopular war in Iraq -- will be unable to turn gay rights into the high-profile wedge issue it was in 2004.
"It's a very different time four years later," said the president of Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solmonese, whose group also sponsored a debate in 2003 that was attended by all the leading candidates other than then-Sen. John Edwards.
"It's the American people and these candidates being in a more enlightened place on (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) issues. And it's an emboldened view that the electorate is not going to let this field stray away from what really matters to the American people."
It will be interesting to see how far the candidates will go during the HRC/Logo Network televised debate on Thursday, August 9th. It will be even more interesting to see, if one of them is elected, how they then back it up with action.
There is a spirited debate going on tagged to The Politico article that is worth checking out and participating in.
August 02, 2007
Calling Out the Presidential Candidates
That's what Matt Foreman, Executive Director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, did in this post on the Task Force's blog, OutSpoken. Here are some excerpts.
The Democratic candidates for president, as a group and individually, express more support for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues and legislative and policy initiatives to improve our lives than any prior set of presidential candidates in the history of American politics. These new standards of support for LGBT people are worthy of our applause, our appreciation and our accolades.
Since 1980, we have suffered the gross indignities of defamations and slanders from a ravenous and rapacious right-wing anti-gay movement, a veritable industry churning out anti-LGBT propaganda at every turn. We endured the AIDS epidemic and the Reagan administration’s cruel indifference while our people fell to illness and then to death. We saw the U.S. Supreme Court uphold state laws that branded us criminals for our sexuality. We have been clubbed by an onslaught of ballot questions that put our lives up to popular vote. Time and again, we’vebeen thrown under the political bus by politicians either in the White House or those who want to get there.
All of this misery has been exacerbated exponentially by the spinelessness or unwillingness of all but a few national leaders to take a stand for us and denounce the animus unleashed on us. Many of our “friends” have simply looked the other way.
We bear our scars and yet remain unbowed. But, we are still waiting for the country’s political leadership to defend our right to live and thrive as a matter of principle, not parse our dreams as a matter of misguided political calculation.
We deserve and we must demand from the Democratic 2008 presidential candidates the simple and straightforward statement that our humanity requires full respect and fair treatment by all and, further, an equally simple and straightforward condemnation of those who seek to use our lives for political gain. This needs to be said in front of all audiences — not just in front of us.
We need leadership. We need strength of vision. And we need to know that the promises of reform come from the candidates' understanding of LGBT people as inseparable from the national community in which we live. There can be no more equivocating or silence about the goodness of our personhood, our families, our relationships. Period.
The Democratic candidates for president, as a group and individually, express more support for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues and legislative and policy initiatives to improve our lives than any prior set of presidential candidates in the history of American politics. These new standards of support for LGBT people are worthy of our applause, our appreciation and our accolades.
Since 1980, we have suffered the gross indignities of defamations and slanders from a ravenous and rapacious right-wing anti-gay movement, a veritable industry churning out anti-LGBT propaganda at every turn. We endured the AIDS epidemic and the Reagan administration’s cruel indifference while our people fell to illness and then to death. We saw the U.S. Supreme Court uphold state laws that branded us criminals for our sexuality. We have been clubbed by an onslaught of ballot questions that put our lives up to popular vote. Time and again, we’vebeen thrown under the political bus by politicians either in the White House or those who want to get there.
All of this misery has been exacerbated exponentially by the spinelessness or unwillingness of all but a few national leaders to take a stand for us and denounce the animus unleashed on us. Many of our “friends” have simply looked the other way.
We bear our scars and yet remain unbowed. But, we are still waiting for the country’s political leadership to defend our right to live and thrive as a matter of principle, not parse our dreams as a matter of misguided political calculation.
We deserve and we must demand from the Democratic 2008 presidential candidates the simple and straightforward statement that our humanity requires full respect and fair treatment by all and, further, an equally simple and straightforward condemnation of those who seek to use our lives for political gain. This needs to be said in front of all audiences — not just in front of us.
We need leadership. We need strength of vision. And we need to know that the promises of reform come from the candidates' understanding of LGBT people as inseparable from the national community in which we live. There can be no more equivocating or silence about the goodness of our personhood, our families, our relationships. Period.
There's plenty more to read in the full blog entry. It's time for the Deomcratic party to stop taking the GLBT vote for granted and earn it. It's also time for someone, anyone with even the slimest chance of getting elected (sorry, Dennis Kucinich, that leaves you out) to take a stand based on what's right, not what polls the best.
They would have my vote and enthusiastic endorsement. At this point, I'm waiting but not holding my breath.
August 01, 2007
Is the Church Producing Athiests?
That's the concern raised in this piece from the Christian Post.
"...some of the recurring questions young adults struggle with but churches often fail to address include the formation and development of the Bible, the presence of evil and suffering in the world, and the question of inspiration and inerrancy.
“In large part, it happens when the church leadership is completely unaware that their members – and not necessarily just the young members – have questions at all,” explained Horvath to The Christian Post. “And [they] continue merrily along thinking that to retain the youth they just need to be entertained.”
Young people question whether they should trust the Bible since it “is so old,” and are not satisfied with the simple answer that they should trust it because God wrote it. Horvath explains that though they understand that to be the Christian position, they want to know how they can be sure of that.
I'm sure one of the more challenging questions young people are asking is why does the church hate homosexuals. As most readers here know, there isn't much of an answer except to cherry pick a few isolated scripture verses, and even then it presents an arguement that doesn't go much beyond "God says so, and so do we."
What I think is an even tougher issue for young people to reconcile is the hypocrisy of church leaders preaching love while they practice bigotry and discrimination, preaching peace while supporting a president who promotes a senseless war, and preaching giving while idolizing material possessions.
If that's all I had to go on, I'd probably have trouble believing there really was a God myself, at least the one the church would be trying to shove down my throat while reaching for my checkbook at the same time.
Fortunately, the God in the Bible doesn't discriminate. He truly loves peace, and he is not materialistic. Christians who understand that need to set an example to support what God truly is. We need to let people see Him through how we live our lives; imperfectly to be sure, but still demonstrating the goodness of Jesus, the New Testament God. We all have the opportunity to live under that covenant.
In today's society, it's no wonder young people don't find the Old Testament God all that appealing. There are churches, and I'm proud to belong to one of them, Believers Covenant Fellowship, that preaches about Jesus and encourages people to go out into the world and live like Him. That way we can help lead people through all that smoke most of the larger demoninations are blowing and show them how to reach out to our true Lord and Savior.
"...some of the recurring questions young adults struggle with but churches often fail to address include the formation and development of the Bible, the presence of evil and suffering in the world, and the question of inspiration and inerrancy.
“In large part, it happens when the church leadership is completely unaware that their members – and not necessarily just the young members – have questions at all,” explained Horvath to The Christian Post. “And [they] continue merrily along thinking that to retain the youth they just need to be entertained.”
Young people question whether they should trust the Bible since it “is so old,” and are not satisfied with the simple answer that they should trust it because God wrote it. Horvath explains that though they understand that to be the Christian position, they want to know how they can be sure of that.
I'm sure one of the more challenging questions young people are asking is why does the church hate homosexuals. As most readers here know, there isn't much of an answer except to cherry pick a few isolated scripture verses, and even then it presents an arguement that doesn't go much beyond "God says so, and so do we."
What I think is an even tougher issue for young people to reconcile is the hypocrisy of church leaders preaching love while they practice bigotry and discrimination, preaching peace while supporting a president who promotes a senseless war, and preaching giving while idolizing material possessions.
If that's all I had to go on, I'd probably have trouble believing there really was a God myself, at least the one the church would be trying to shove down my throat while reaching for my checkbook at the same time.
Fortunately, the God in the Bible doesn't discriminate. He truly loves peace, and he is not materialistic. Christians who understand that need to set an example to support what God truly is. We need to let people see Him through how we live our lives; imperfectly to be sure, but still demonstrating the goodness of Jesus, the New Testament God. We all have the opportunity to live under that covenant.
In today's society, it's no wonder young people don't find the Old Testament God all that appealing. There are churches, and I'm proud to belong to one of them, Believers Covenant Fellowship, that preaches about Jesus and encourages people to go out into the world and live like Him. That way we can help lead people through all that smoke most of the larger demoninations are blowing and show them how to reach out to our true Lord and Savior.
July 31, 2007
Activism Pays Off in New Jersey
From The New York Blade:
After persuasion from New Jersey's governor and attorney general, United Parcel Service of America announced Monday that it would extend health insurance benefits to the civil union partners of gay employees.
The policy change has to do with New Jersey's civil unions law, which took effect in February, and seeks to give gay couples the same rights in the state as married couples.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine sent Atlanta-based UPS a letter on July 20 asking the shipping giant to change its stance.
The company had previously said that civil union partners were legally different from spouses, and therefore, the partners were not entitled to the same benefits that spouses of the company's hourly workers receive.
Gay rights advocates say UPS's legal interpretation was faulty.
They say that many other employers, though, have taken the same stance. The advocates maintain that gay couples would get equal treatment only if they are allowed to marry.
UPS spokesman Norman Black said the company is reviewing its policies in Connecticut and Vermont, which also offer civil unions.
Management and administrative staff in the company nationwide already receive domestic partnership benefits.
Before Monday, the company had said it would extend them to all its hourly union workers, but couldn't outside its collective bargaining agreement. So, only hourly employees in Massachusetts, where gay marriage is legal, received the benefits for their partners.
You can bet that this change of course by UPS was also influenced by the advocacy efforts of groups like Garden State Equality and Lambda Legal among others. Kudos to them and Governor Corzine for their continued efforts to see that the laws of New Jersey are properly enforced.
Lambda Legal has more on their website about this decision and the civil union laws in New Jersey. Click here to read that information.
After persuasion from New Jersey's governor and attorney general, United Parcel Service of America announced Monday that it would extend health insurance benefits to the civil union partners of gay employees.
The policy change has to do with New Jersey's civil unions law, which took effect in February, and seeks to give gay couples the same rights in the state as married couples.
Gov. Jon S. Corzine sent Atlanta-based UPS a letter on July 20 asking the shipping giant to change its stance.
The company had previously said that civil union partners were legally different from spouses, and therefore, the partners were not entitled to the same benefits that spouses of the company's hourly workers receive.
Gay rights advocates say UPS's legal interpretation was faulty.
They say that many other employers, though, have taken the same stance. The advocates maintain that gay couples would get equal treatment only if they are allowed to marry.
UPS spokesman Norman Black said the company is reviewing its policies in Connecticut and Vermont, which also offer civil unions.
Management and administrative staff in the company nationwide already receive domestic partnership benefits.
Before Monday, the company had said it would extend them to all its hourly union workers, but couldn't outside its collective bargaining agreement. So, only hourly employees in Massachusetts, where gay marriage is legal, received the benefits for their partners.
You can bet that this change of course by UPS was also influenced by the advocacy efforts of groups like Garden State Equality and Lambda Legal among others. Kudos to them and Governor Corzine for their continued efforts to see that the laws of New Jersey are properly enforced.
Lambda Legal has more on their website about this decision and the civil union laws in New Jersey. Click here to read that information.
July 30, 2007
Human Rights Are Not a Bargaining Chip
I ran across this piece on Talk to Action which I couldn't agree with more. I hope you do too. Here's the key points for me:
Human Rights are Not Political Commodities
We understand the same First Amendment that guarantees separation of church and state guarantees the rights of Christian conservatives to defend their views in the public square, and to seek redress of grievances through a variety of political and social channels.
In recent months, however, we have seen indications that some in the leadership of the Democratic Party, and some of its candidates for public office, are seeking the votes of Christian conservatives by suggesting there is room to compromise on reproductive rights and gay rights.
While public debates over social issues are a sign of a healthy democracy; we do not believe is proper for politicians to negotiate away basic human rights for any group of people in the United States.
The problem is not “gay rights” or “gay marriage.” The problem is building a society where the basic human rights of all people are respected and defended. Under the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, there is no such thing as “Special Rights.” When some Christian conservatives claim that gay people want “Special Rights,” it is a falsehood. Our rights, and the rights of our friends, relatives, and neighbors in LGBTQ communities, are not political commodities to be traded for votes.
They shouldn't be, anyway. When you are deciding who to vote for in the 2008 elections, I hope you try to find someone who would not make that kind of trade.
Human Rights are Not Political Commodities
We understand the same First Amendment that guarantees separation of church and state guarantees the rights of Christian conservatives to defend their views in the public square, and to seek redress of grievances through a variety of political and social channels.
In recent months, however, we have seen indications that some in the leadership of the Democratic Party, and some of its candidates for public office, are seeking the votes of Christian conservatives by suggesting there is room to compromise on reproductive rights and gay rights.
While public debates over social issues are a sign of a healthy democracy; we do not believe is proper for politicians to negotiate away basic human rights for any group of people in the United States.
The problem is not “gay rights” or “gay marriage.” The problem is building a society where the basic human rights of all people are respected and defended. Under the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, there is no such thing as “Special Rights.” When some Christian conservatives claim that gay people want “Special Rights,” it is a falsehood. Our rights, and the rights of our friends, relatives, and neighbors in LGBTQ communities, are not political commodities to be traded for votes.
They shouldn't be, anyway. When you are deciding who to vote for in the 2008 elections, I hope you try to find someone who would not make that kind of trade.
July 29, 2007
Younger Gay Athletes Coming Out in Locker Rooms
While the atmosphere in professional sports locker rooms is still perceived as being too homophobic for athletes to be comfortable coming out as gay, the attitudes among high school and college athletes and their teammates appears to be changing and becoming more accepting.
A 2007 Gallup poll found that 57% of Americans viewed homosexuality as an "acceptable alternative lifestyle," an increase of 11 percentage points from four years ago. The percentage was higher among 18- to 29-year-olds.
Almost three-quarters of heterosexual adults said they would not change their feelings toward a favorite male athlete if he came out, according to a recent survey by Harris Interactive and Witeck-Combs Communications.
"It's not like the old days," said David Kopay, a former National Football League player who stirred controversy by announcing he was homosexual in 1975.
This article from the Los Angeles Times chronicles the coming out of several young athletes, some of whom still faced prejudice but are all handling it and glad they did come out.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
A 2007 Gallup poll found that 57% of Americans viewed homosexuality as an "acceptable alternative lifestyle," an increase of 11 percentage points from four years ago. The percentage was higher among 18- to 29-year-olds.
Almost three-quarters of heterosexual adults said they would not change their feelings toward a favorite male athlete if he came out, according to a recent survey by Harris Interactive and Witeck-Combs Communications.
"It's not like the old days," said David Kopay, a former National Football League player who stirred controversy by announcing he was homosexual in 1975.
This article from the Los Angeles Times chronicles the coming out of several young athletes, some of whom still faced prejudice but are all handling it and glad they did come out.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
July 28, 2007
So That's What It Feels Like
I had my first direct, mild, brush with bigotry tonight, and it happened at my home.
I was sitting in our family room with Pastor Brenda and happened to see an unfamiliar man walk up our driveway. He was walking his dog and had something in his hand that he was taking to the neighbor's recycle bin. I recognized the item as the sign we've been displaying in our yard for several weeks from Equality Maryland that says, "Civil Marriage is a Civil Right." There is also a website supporting that campaign.
I shot out of the house and confronted the elderly man who had apparently walked past our yard, picked up the sign, and deposited it in the trash. He said, noteably without making eye contact with me, that the sign was "littering up the neighborhood."
I told him "No it isn't, it is expressing an opinion. You had no right to throw it away." Rather than taking an opportunity to engage in dialogue, forget the apology he owed me, he slinked away to his home further down the street.
It's easy to be a bigot when no one is watching, isn't it? Not quite as easy when someone calls you on it. It's pretty hard to respect someone like that too.
I was sitting in our family room with Pastor Brenda and happened to see an unfamiliar man walk up our driveway. He was walking his dog and had something in his hand that he was taking to the neighbor's recycle bin. I recognized the item as the sign we've been displaying in our yard for several weeks from Equality Maryland that says, "Civil Marriage is a Civil Right." There is also a website supporting that campaign.
I shot out of the house and confronted the elderly man who had apparently walked past our yard, picked up the sign, and deposited it in the trash. He said, noteably without making eye contact with me, that the sign was "littering up the neighborhood."
I told him "No it isn't, it is expressing an opinion. You had no right to throw it away." Rather than taking an opportunity to engage in dialogue, forget the apology he owed me, he slinked away to his home further down the street.
It's easy to be a bigot when no one is watching, isn't it? Not quite as easy when someone calls you on it. It's pretty hard to respect someone like that too.
"Why Come Out?"
That's the question asked by Alex Blaze at The Bilerico Project. He has the data to indicate it's not so you can get ahead in the world:
Considering that, when adjusted for occupation and several other factors, the Task Force found that gay men make about 83% what the average straight man does, I really can't blame someone for being closeted. This UCLA study found that same-sex couples of either sex made about $12,000 less than their straight counterparts and were about 23% less likely to have a college degree. In fact, GLSEN found that LGBT-identified high school students were about twice as likely to not have any sort of post-secondary education on the mind.
And that's just when it comes to economic success. Queer-identified people are still more likely to be victims of violence, more likely to to be turned away from homeless shelters, more likely to be ostracized from their families. For what? A label?
How often have you heard people talk about how gay couples are always so affluent? Surely some are, but according to those statistics they have a lesser chance of being so than a straight couple.
So we're back at the main question of "Why come out?" It seems to be inviting a whole lot of trouble for not so much return. Of course, there are other ways to measure that return in terms of ethics and honesty, comfortability with one's identity, and slightly more psychic coherence, but those material disadvantages to coming out can be quite strong.
Well, I'm not planning on jumping back in the closet at this age, even though the system punishes people who are out and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Are the material and economic benefits of staying in the closet worth it? It would be easy for me to say no because I don't have to face that decision myself. I do feel strongly, however, that someone living a lie, regardless of what that lie is, is doing more damage to themselves in the long run than all of society put together can inflict upon them.
Denying any of the gifts God gave you, even if one of them is being gay, will leave you short of realizing His plan for your life. Even if the road He lays out has a lot of potholes in it, He promised us it is still the best path to take for our lives.
Considering that, when adjusted for occupation and several other factors, the Task Force found that gay men make about 83% what the average straight man does, I really can't blame someone for being closeted. This UCLA study found that same-sex couples of either sex made about $12,000 less than their straight counterparts and were about 23% less likely to have a college degree. In fact, GLSEN found that LGBT-identified high school students were about twice as likely to not have any sort of post-secondary education on the mind.
And that's just when it comes to economic success. Queer-identified people are still more likely to be victims of violence, more likely to to be turned away from homeless shelters, more likely to be ostracized from their families. For what? A label?
How often have you heard people talk about how gay couples are always so affluent? Surely some are, but according to those statistics they have a lesser chance of being so than a straight couple.
So we're back at the main question of "Why come out?" It seems to be inviting a whole lot of trouble for not so much return. Of course, there are other ways to measure that return in terms of ethics and honesty, comfortability with one's identity, and slightly more psychic coherence, but those material disadvantages to coming out can be quite strong.
Well, I'm not planning on jumping back in the closet at this age, even though the system punishes people who are out and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Are the material and economic benefits of staying in the closet worth it? It would be easy for me to say no because I don't have to face that decision myself. I do feel strongly, however, that someone living a lie, regardless of what that lie is, is doing more damage to themselves in the long run than all of society put together can inflict upon them.
Denying any of the gifts God gave you, even if one of them is being gay, will leave you short of realizing His plan for your life. Even if the road He lays out has a lot of potholes in it, He promised us it is still the best path to take for our lives.
July 27, 2007
"'Trans'-forming Corporate America
In another example of business stepping far ahead of legislators in the acceptance of LGBT people, Fortune magazine posted an article about the T; how companies are becoming more progressive in handling employment situations with transgender people.
A 2007 "State of the Workplace" report just published by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) says that 125 of the Fortune 500 companies now specifically prohibit job discrimination against transgender employees. Five years ago, only 15 of the Fortune 500 promised to protect transgender people from on-the-job bias.
Just in the last 18 months, defense contractors Honeywell, Boeing (Charts, Fortune 500) and Northrop Grumman (Charts, Fortune 500), automakers Ford and General Motors (Charts, Fortune 500), hotel firms Hilton (Charts, Fortune 500), Starwood and Marriott (Charts, Fortune 500) and Internet giants Yahoo and Google (Charts, Fortune 500) have added protections for transgender workers. About 70 big companies offer comprehensive medical coverage for transgender employees, including those in transition, according to the HRC.
Why the change?
"This is a direct result of the organizing that employees have done on the issue of sexual orientation," says Daryl Herrschaft, who oversees the HRC's workplace project. As gay and lesbian employees form internal networking and lobbying groups, they have been able to persuade their employers to protect transgender rights as well.
Broader social forces are also at work. Movies like "Boys Don't Cry" (1999) and "Transmerica" (2005) exposed transgender characters to audiences. Last spring, Newsweek published a cover story called "The Mystery of Gender," and an L.A. Times sportswriter named Mike Penner told his readers that he would take a vacation and return as a woman, Christine Daniels.
I've written this before regarding corporations establishing policies aimed at preventing discrimination toward gay and lesbian employees, but the point is worth repeating: as a rule businesses are not going to take measures that are not in their best interest.
My experience has taught me that good employees are hard to find, so it is worth maintaining positive relationships with them, even if they used to wear a coat and tie and now wear a dress. More and more companies are seeing the value of doing just that.
A 2007 "State of the Workplace" report just published by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) says that 125 of the Fortune 500 companies now specifically prohibit job discrimination against transgender employees. Five years ago, only 15 of the Fortune 500 promised to protect transgender people from on-the-job bias.
Just in the last 18 months, defense contractors Honeywell, Boeing (Charts, Fortune 500) and Northrop Grumman (Charts, Fortune 500), automakers Ford and General Motors (Charts, Fortune 500), hotel firms Hilton (Charts, Fortune 500), Starwood and Marriott (Charts, Fortune 500) and Internet giants Yahoo and Google (Charts, Fortune 500) have added protections for transgender workers. About 70 big companies offer comprehensive medical coverage for transgender employees, including those in transition, according to the HRC.
Why the change?
"This is a direct result of the organizing that employees have done on the issue of sexual orientation," says Daryl Herrschaft, who oversees the HRC's workplace project. As gay and lesbian employees form internal networking and lobbying groups, they have been able to persuade their employers to protect transgender rights as well.
Broader social forces are also at work. Movies like "Boys Don't Cry" (1999) and "Transmerica" (2005) exposed transgender characters to audiences. Last spring, Newsweek published a cover story called "The Mystery of Gender," and an L.A. Times sportswriter named Mike Penner told his readers that he would take a vacation and return as a woman, Christine Daniels.
I've written this before regarding corporations establishing policies aimed at preventing discrimination toward gay and lesbian employees, but the point is worth repeating: as a rule businesses are not going to take measures that are not in their best interest.
My experience has taught me that good employees are hard to find, so it is worth maintaining positive relationships with them, even if they used to wear a coat and tie and now wear a dress. More and more companies are seeing the value of doing just that.
Will Lutherans Abolish Celibacy Requirement for Gay & Lesbian Clergy?
From the Chicago Sun-Times via Religion Headlines.
The Lutheran pastor soon to be bishop of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod wants his denomination to lift a celibacy requirement for gay and lesbian clergy.
"That's where I think the church is going," Bishop-elect Wayne Miller of Aurora said. "That's where I think it needs to go."
Eventually, gay and lesbian clergy in monogamous, same-sex relationships could be allowed to serve.
He's hoping the change will come next month in Chicago, where the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is conducting its churchwide assembly. Nearly a third of the denomination's 65 synods are asking for a policy shift in clergy standards.
John Roberts of Chicago also hopes it could lead to the reinstatement of gay clergy removed from ministry. He says he was ousted as pastor of a Michigan church in the 1990s after he confided to his bishop that he was gay.
"He gave me 11 days to leave the parish and not tell anyone," the 58-year-old Roberts said. "I still feel that call to pastoral ministry."
With 4.8 million baptized members, the ELCA, with headquarters in Chicago, is the nation's seventh-largest denomination. The Metropolitan Chicago Synod includes 217 congregations in Cook, DuPage, Kane and Lake counties.
Even with this restrictive policy, the Lutheran church is ahead of most mainline denominations. Hopefully they will continue to be led forward by people like John Roberts.
Click here to read the entire article, including a capsule summary of where the major denominations stand on ordaining gays and lesbians.
The Lutheran pastor soon to be bishop of the Metropolitan Chicago Synod wants his denomination to lift a celibacy requirement for gay and lesbian clergy.
"That's where I think the church is going," Bishop-elect Wayne Miller of Aurora said. "That's where I think it needs to go."
Eventually, gay and lesbian clergy in monogamous, same-sex relationships could be allowed to serve.
He's hoping the change will come next month in Chicago, where the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is conducting its churchwide assembly. Nearly a third of the denomination's 65 synods are asking for a policy shift in clergy standards.
John Roberts of Chicago also hopes it could lead to the reinstatement of gay clergy removed from ministry. He says he was ousted as pastor of a Michigan church in the 1990s after he confided to his bishop that he was gay.
"He gave me 11 days to leave the parish and not tell anyone," the 58-year-old Roberts said. "I still feel that call to pastoral ministry."
With 4.8 million baptized members, the ELCA, with headquarters in Chicago, is the nation's seventh-largest denomination. The Metropolitan Chicago Synod includes 217 congregations in Cook, DuPage, Kane and Lake counties.
Even with this restrictive policy, the Lutheran church is ahead of most mainline denominations. Hopefully they will continue to be led forward by people like John Roberts.
Click here to read the entire article, including a capsule summary of where the major denominations stand on ordaining gays and lesbians.
July 26, 2007
Baptists Try For Unity Without Pro Gay Groups
From the Christian Post:
Two pro-gay national Baptist organizations have been denied official participation in an upcoming milestone gathering focused on Baptist unity.
The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (AWAB) and the Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America, both of which openly affirm gays and lesbians in the life of the national bodies, were told they cannot participate as an organization in the "Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant" in January 2008. Members of the two bodies, however, can participate as individuals.
The New Baptist Covenant is an effort spearheaded by former president Jimmy Carter and Bill Underwood, president of Mercer University in Atlanta, to counter the "negative" Baptist image presented in the media and to demonstrate Baptist unity around social causes such as poverty and AIDS as well as evangelism. Carter has expressed concern that the most common opinion about Baptist is that they cannot get along.
Ken Pennings, executive director of the AWAB, argued, "Here we are at a critical juncture when Baptists of all stripes are coming together to take a strong stand for justice for all of God's children, and the very people in American society being scapegoated and marginalized the most … are not going to be invited to participate.”
The AWAB and the Baptist Peace Fellowship had applied for membership in the North American Baptist Fellowship and asked to be included as sponsors of the upcoming pan-Baptist gathering, according to Stanford. The NABF executive committee denied their membership which excludes them from being official sponsors of the new covenant.
“This really is more like the Old Covenant than the New Covenant,” Pennings said, according to ABP. “Why would we want to participate in this? There’s nothing new about this; it’s the same old exclusion.”
A popular misconception here is that all baptists fall under the heading of Sothern Baptists (who are not participating in this effort either). Sadly, the group that is excluding the pro-gay organizations are considered to be less conservative than the SBC (most things are), yet is still not open to considering acceptance of GLBT people.
You can't have true unity and exclude a group at the same time, that's just common sense and an understanding of what the word unity means. What a shame.
Here is the entire article from the Christian Post.
Two pro-gay national Baptist organizations have been denied official participation in an upcoming milestone gathering focused on Baptist unity.
The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (AWAB) and the Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America, both of which openly affirm gays and lesbians in the life of the national bodies, were told they cannot participate as an organization in the "Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant" in January 2008. Members of the two bodies, however, can participate as individuals.
The New Baptist Covenant is an effort spearheaded by former president Jimmy Carter and Bill Underwood, president of Mercer University in Atlanta, to counter the "negative" Baptist image presented in the media and to demonstrate Baptist unity around social causes such as poverty and AIDS as well as evangelism. Carter has expressed concern that the most common opinion about Baptist is that they cannot get along.
Ken Pennings, executive director of the AWAB, argued, "Here we are at a critical juncture when Baptists of all stripes are coming together to take a strong stand for justice for all of God's children, and the very people in American society being scapegoated and marginalized the most … are not going to be invited to participate.”
The AWAB and the Baptist Peace Fellowship had applied for membership in the North American Baptist Fellowship and asked to be included as sponsors of the upcoming pan-Baptist gathering, according to Stanford. The NABF executive committee denied their membership which excludes them from being official sponsors of the new covenant.
“This really is more like the Old Covenant than the New Covenant,” Pennings said, according to ABP. “Why would we want to participate in this? There’s nothing new about this; it’s the same old exclusion.”
A popular misconception here is that all baptists fall under the heading of Sothern Baptists (who are not participating in this effort either). Sadly, the group that is excluding the pro-gay organizations are considered to be less conservative than the SBC (most things are), yet is still not open to considering acceptance of GLBT people.
You can't have true unity and exclude a group at the same time, that's just common sense and an understanding of what the word unity means. What a shame.
Here is the entire article from the Christian Post.
July 23, 2007
Thanks for your support!
I sincerely and deeply appreciate all of the loving, caring messages you folks have left regarding the recent passing of my brother. From good friends like Sharone & Erica to those of you who I have never met, all your prayers, well wishes, and support are cherrished.
My brother's memorial service will be Tuesday, and I will return home Wednesday. I should be back blogging on a regular basis by Thursday night. I would love your continued support and prayers, especially for Mike who has to adjust being without the person he shared his life with for nearly eleven years.
My brother's memorial service will be Tuesday, and I will return home Wednesday. I should be back blogging on a regular basis by Thursday night. I would love your continued support and prayers, especially for Mike who has to adjust being without the person he shared his life with for nearly eleven years.
July 21, 2007
A Death In the Family
My blogging will be sporadic, if at all, over the next few days. My brother, who I've written about on this blog, passed away suddenly yesterday. He was 57 years old. I'm heading up to Rochester to wrap up his affairs and hopefully give strength to his partner, as he did for me when my wife Bette passed away a few years ago.
I would appreciate your prayers, especially for Mike as he transitions into his new life without my brother.
I would appreciate your prayers, especially for Mike as he transitions into his new life without my brother.
Bishop John Shelby Spong at the Dignity USA Conference
For those of you who don't know, there are GLBT Roman Catholics who are out and working for change in their church. Their organization, Dignity USA, has this for their vision statement:
DignityUSA envisions and works for a time when Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Catholics are affirmed and experience dignity through the integration of their spirituality with their sexuality, and as beloved persons of God participate fully in all aspects of life within the Church and Society.
The organization, which has been around since 1969, recently held their annual convention in Austin, Texas. Their keynote speaker was the well known author and retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong. Over at The Wild Reed, there is extensive coverage of his comments, and I encourage you to check them out, but this excerpt really jumped out at me:
Dignity’s members are not threatening to leave their Church, they are threatening to stay! “This is our Church too,” they say, and “the hierarchy cannot define Catholicism in such a way as to exclude us.” They live out their Catholic lives in faithfulness, not in order to be troublesome, but to help to bring to Catholicism the inclusion that is called for in the gospel of Jesus. They are confident they will win this struggle for the soul of their Church and are encouraged by the incontrovertible fact that changes in consciousness are never reversed.
Inevitably every part of the Christian Church will lay aside its homosexual prejudices and embrace its gay, lesbian, transgender and bi-sexual brothers and sisters as the creation of God, the beloved of Christ and as those empowered to be all that they can be in the Holy Spirit. Benedict XVI is not the voice of the Catholic future; indeed, he will ultimately be little more than a negative footnote in Catholic history.
Every prejudice that is publicly debated is already dying, so this victory is inevitable. Diehard, retrogressive elements in every Christian Church lose ground daily. They will not prevail in this struggle. Christians cannot continue to sing, “Just as I am without one plea, O Lamb of God, I come,” and not live out that invitation.
The embarrassment of the Christian Church in our time will not result from the feared split over homosexuality; it will result rather from those Christian leaders who continue to value unity and institutional peace over truth and justice. Those are the people destined to discover that they do not, cannot and will not own the future. That future will belong to DignityUSA, to John McNeill, Sister Jeannine Gramick, Daniel Helminiak and their counterparts in every Christian tradition, who act without fear to make the Christian Church whole and to call it to be a sign of the Kingdom of God in our divided world. Indeed we live today at the dawn of a new era.
The comments of Pope Benedict that Bishop Spong referred to was his recent statement reminding everyone of the belief, held by the Catholic church for centuries, that it is the only truly Christian faith. That belief is clearly stated in the Nicene Creed that is recited at every Mass, one which I echoed (with some reservation) for several years after being received into the church (and since leaving it). There was no new ground broken here. Rather, it was an old row being replowed.
Thankfully, I believe no one man or group of men have all the answers, and that there is more than one path to God. I also firmly believe and know in my heart that there is a path for my GLBT brothers and sisters to come as they are into fellowship with God. I pray that Bishop Spong is correct and their full inclusion into the church is inevitable.
DignityUSA envisions and works for a time when Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Catholics are affirmed and experience dignity through the integration of their spirituality with their sexuality, and as beloved persons of God participate fully in all aspects of life within the Church and Society.
The organization, which has been around since 1969, recently held their annual convention in Austin, Texas. Their keynote speaker was the well known author and retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong. Over at The Wild Reed, there is extensive coverage of his comments, and I encourage you to check them out, but this excerpt really jumped out at me:
Dignity’s members are not threatening to leave their Church, they are threatening to stay! “This is our Church too,” they say, and “the hierarchy cannot define Catholicism in such a way as to exclude us.” They live out their Catholic lives in faithfulness, not in order to be troublesome, but to help to bring to Catholicism the inclusion that is called for in the gospel of Jesus. They are confident they will win this struggle for the soul of their Church and are encouraged by the incontrovertible fact that changes in consciousness are never reversed.
Inevitably every part of the Christian Church will lay aside its homosexual prejudices and embrace its gay, lesbian, transgender and bi-sexual brothers and sisters as the creation of God, the beloved of Christ and as those empowered to be all that they can be in the Holy Spirit. Benedict XVI is not the voice of the Catholic future; indeed, he will ultimately be little more than a negative footnote in Catholic history.
Every prejudice that is publicly debated is already dying, so this victory is inevitable. Diehard, retrogressive elements in every Christian Church lose ground daily. They will not prevail in this struggle. Christians cannot continue to sing, “Just as I am without one plea, O Lamb of God, I come,” and not live out that invitation.
The embarrassment of the Christian Church in our time will not result from the feared split over homosexuality; it will result rather from those Christian leaders who continue to value unity and institutional peace over truth and justice. Those are the people destined to discover that they do not, cannot and will not own the future. That future will belong to DignityUSA, to John McNeill, Sister Jeannine Gramick, Daniel Helminiak and their counterparts in every Christian tradition, who act without fear to make the Christian Church whole and to call it to be a sign of the Kingdom of God in our divided world. Indeed we live today at the dawn of a new era.
The comments of Pope Benedict that Bishop Spong referred to was his recent statement reminding everyone of the belief, held by the Catholic church for centuries, that it is the only truly Christian faith. That belief is clearly stated in the Nicene Creed that is recited at every Mass, one which I echoed (with some reservation) for several years after being received into the church (and since leaving it). There was no new ground broken here. Rather, it was an old row being replowed.
Thankfully, I believe no one man or group of men have all the answers, and that there is more than one path to God. I also firmly believe and know in my heart that there is a path for my GLBT brothers and sisters to come as they are into fellowship with God. I pray that Bishop Spong is correct and their full inclusion into the church is inevitable.
July 20, 2007
"Gay Rights Promote Fairness For All"
The following op-ed piece was published in the Salem, Oregon StatesmanJournal. The writer, Gloria Holland, is a straight woman who is an activist in the state, which is one of the more GLBT friendly ones in the nation. Like the parents in Michigan I wrote about yesterday, she has had first-hand experience in dealing with GLBT issues since her daughter came out to her as a lesbian.
Gay Rights Promote Fairness For All
About 10 years ago, I was presented with an opportunity to learn a great deal about a segment of our society about which I was very ill informed.
During my life and career as an educator, I had known many gay and lesbian friends and colleagues. Yet, it wasn't until my daughter was brave enough to tell me that she might become involved with a woman that I began to educate myself around the specific issues faced by the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender citizens of our state.
I learned that gays were discriminated against in housing, health care, jobs, hospital emergencies, retirement benefits and much more.
I learned that same-sex couples who have been in committed relationships as long as my husband and I, who raised children together and worshipped together, were forced to lead secret, closeted existences out of fear and were often left to fend for themselves with no legal rights during life's hardest times.
I learned that gay kids are far more likely than their heterosexual counterparts to be injured with a weapon, drop out of school or commit suicide.
I also learned that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people wish only to care for their own loved ones, not to undermine my or anyone else's ability to do the same. The people I have come to know during the past 10 years simply want to live, as I do, in an Oregon that is free from discrimination, values equality and moves forward toward fairness for all our families.
Fortunately, our Legislature recently passed two new laws that bring Oregon one step closer to fair and equal rights for all, and many of our families one step closer to real security.
Our new Domestic Partnership law recognizes families as families. This legal recognition is an important tool, one from which many families have been shut out, to better cope during emergencies and better protect and care for loved ones.
Oregon's second new law ends discrimination in the areas of housing, employment and public accommodations. Such language has existed in Oregon law for many years to protect our citizens on the basis of race, gender, creed and age. This new language simply adds to existing law assurance that Oregonians won't be fired, evicted or denied service at a restaurant or hotel just because of their sexual orientation.
Sadly, a divisive effort has already begun to force these laws to ballot, certainly to be followed by an aggressive campaign to overturn them. I absolutely will not be signing these petitions, and invite others to join me.
As a community, we all suffer when one group of people is set apart and shut out from basic human rights. It's past time to end our culture of divisiveness and work toward a fairer Oregon. I urge you to look past the political arguments and see how personal these laws are for so many families, just like yours or mine.
It's a lot harder to discriminate against a group when you put live faces on the issues and remember that these are flesh and blood people just like everyone else.
Gay Rights Promote Fairness For All
About 10 years ago, I was presented with an opportunity to learn a great deal about a segment of our society about which I was very ill informed.
During my life and career as an educator, I had known many gay and lesbian friends and colleagues. Yet, it wasn't until my daughter was brave enough to tell me that she might become involved with a woman that I began to educate myself around the specific issues faced by the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender citizens of our state.
I learned that gays were discriminated against in housing, health care, jobs, hospital emergencies, retirement benefits and much more.
I learned that same-sex couples who have been in committed relationships as long as my husband and I, who raised children together and worshipped together, were forced to lead secret, closeted existences out of fear and were often left to fend for themselves with no legal rights during life's hardest times.
I learned that gay kids are far more likely than their heterosexual counterparts to be injured with a weapon, drop out of school or commit suicide.
I also learned that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people wish only to care for their own loved ones, not to undermine my or anyone else's ability to do the same. The people I have come to know during the past 10 years simply want to live, as I do, in an Oregon that is free from discrimination, values equality and moves forward toward fairness for all our families.
Fortunately, our Legislature recently passed two new laws that bring Oregon one step closer to fair and equal rights for all, and many of our families one step closer to real security.
Our new Domestic Partnership law recognizes families as families. This legal recognition is an important tool, one from which many families have been shut out, to better cope during emergencies and better protect and care for loved ones.
Oregon's second new law ends discrimination in the areas of housing, employment and public accommodations. Such language has existed in Oregon law for many years to protect our citizens on the basis of race, gender, creed and age. This new language simply adds to existing law assurance that Oregonians won't be fired, evicted or denied service at a restaurant or hotel just because of their sexual orientation.
Sadly, a divisive effort has already begun to force these laws to ballot, certainly to be followed by an aggressive campaign to overturn them. I absolutely will not be signing these petitions, and invite others to join me.
As a community, we all suffer when one group of people is set apart and shut out from basic human rights. It's past time to end our culture of divisiveness and work toward a fairer Oregon. I urge you to look past the political arguments and see how personal these laws are for so many families, just like yours or mine.
It's a lot harder to discriminate against a group when you put live faces on the issues and remember that these are flesh and blood people just like everyone else.
There's A Gay Think-Tank Working for GLBT Equality
If you are a TV political talk-show junkie, you've no doubt seen representatives from conservative "think-tanks" like the Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institute, etc. waxing philisophic on the issues of the day. Well, it turns out there is an institute that is working to counter the right-wing and work for LGBT equality.
The Rockway Institute is based in San Francisco. Here is their mission statement from the organization's website:
The nonpartisan Rockway Institute brings together scientific research and professional expertise to counter antigay prejudice and inform public policies affecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. The Institute's view is that public opinion, policies, and programs should be shaped by the facts about LGBT lives, not by political ideology. A primary goal is to organize the most knowledgeable social scientists, mental health professionals, and physicians in the United States to provide accurate information about LGBT issues to the media, legislatures, and courts. The Institute also conducts targeted research projects to address the nation's most pressing LGBT public policy questions.
I encourage you to check out their website and learn more about the resources they are employing to balance the public debate on issues affecting the LGBT community.
The Rockway Institute is based in San Francisco. Here is their mission statement from the organization's website:
The nonpartisan Rockway Institute brings together scientific research and professional expertise to counter antigay prejudice and inform public policies affecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. The Institute's view is that public opinion, policies, and programs should be shaped by the facts about LGBT lives, not by political ideology. A primary goal is to organize the most knowledgeable social scientists, mental health professionals, and physicians in the United States to provide accurate information about LGBT issues to the media, legislatures, and courts. The Institute also conducts targeted research projects to address the nation's most pressing LGBT public policy questions.
I encourage you to check out their website and learn more about the resources they are employing to balance the public debate on issues affecting the LGBT community.
July 19, 2007
Parents Choose Gay Son Over Church and Friends
This is a moving story about how a family stood up for one of their own, placing their love for a son above everything else, and losing most of it as a result.
An article in the Muskegon (MI) Chronicle tells us how a 10th grade boy came out to his family (dude, you could have picked a better day than Super Bowl Sunday for crying out loud, but I digress) who, instead of disowning him, circled around him with love and support.
The cost was high. The parents lost most of their counseling clients, the father lost his position as a minister, and most of the family's friends deserted them.
"We moved here because (West Michigan) is a great place to raise a family, and that's true, unless one of them turns out to be gay," said Colette Beighley who is originally from San Francisco. "We live in an area that demands assimilation."
"I'm so proud of my kids," Colette Beighley said. "That's the coolest thing that came out of this -- how much they love each other."
I've written a lot here about the importance of straight allies, but the most significant ones for a GLBT person are often the ones in their own family.
Click here to read details of the journey the Beighley family took with their gay son in the Muskegon Chronicle article.
Thanks to the Triangle foundation for the tip. Colette Beighley is an active member of the Triangle Foundation and has her own blog here.
An article in the Muskegon (MI) Chronicle tells us how a 10th grade boy came out to his family (dude, you could have picked a better day than Super Bowl Sunday for crying out loud, but I digress) who, instead of disowning him, circled around him with love and support.
The cost was high. The parents lost most of their counseling clients, the father lost his position as a minister, and most of the family's friends deserted them.
"We moved here because (West Michigan) is a great place to raise a family, and that's true, unless one of them turns out to be gay," said Colette Beighley who is originally from San Francisco. "We live in an area that demands assimilation."
"I'm so proud of my kids," Colette Beighley said. "That's the coolest thing that came out of this -- how much they love each other."
I've written a lot here about the importance of straight allies, but the most significant ones for a GLBT person are often the ones in their own family.
Click here to read details of the journey the Beighley family took with their gay son in the Muskegon Chronicle article.
Thanks to the Triangle foundation for the tip. Colette Beighley is an active member of the Triangle Foundation and has her own blog here.
Questioning the "Sanctity" of Marriage
One of the right-wing arguements against same-sex marriage is that it would destroy "the sanctity of marriage." An op-ed piece by Chris Kocher of the Binghamton (NY) Press & Sun-Bulletin questions that premise:
So I'm always a little puzzled when people talk about the "sanctity" of marriage. At least half of Americans are not taking the "until death do us part" portion of the wedding vows to heart. Marriage has become just another part of our throwaway culture -- some people even have "starter marriages" in their 20s and settle into the "real thing" the second time around.
Which brings us around to same-sex marriage. I say, let gay couples give it a shot -- at this point, can they screw it up any more than the heterosexuals? Perhaps so, but they should get a chance to have both sides of the coin: happiness and sadness, love and breakup. It seems only fair.
I understand how some people object to same-sex marriage on religious grounds, but we're living in a country with a clear separation of church and state. What one religion believes -- and there's some debate about that, as recent back-and-forth articles on these pages can attest -- should not dictate to everyone. As I recall, about half the country did not want civil rights for blacks in the 1960s (some people still don't), but that became the law of the land because it was the right thing to do.
We've solicited readers' opinions about same-sex marriage for a feature that will run next week, and we've had a number of responses from both sides of the issue. As a preview, I'd like to share a favorite one, from Ronald Kracht of Windsor:
"One of the things I have learned in the past 35 years is that no other relationship, happy or unhappy, married or unmarried, straight or gay, has any impact on the strength or sanctity of my marriage. I don't believe that any 'separate but equal' institution is warranted or appropriate. Any religious body which chooses not to approve of same-sex marriage should be allowed to refuse to perform such marriages."
I could not have said it better myself.
Neither could I.
So I'm always a little puzzled when people talk about the "sanctity" of marriage. At least half of Americans are not taking the "until death do us part" portion of the wedding vows to heart. Marriage has become just another part of our throwaway culture -- some people even have "starter marriages" in their 20s and settle into the "real thing" the second time around.
Which brings us around to same-sex marriage. I say, let gay couples give it a shot -- at this point, can they screw it up any more than the heterosexuals? Perhaps so, but they should get a chance to have both sides of the coin: happiness and sadness, love and breakup. It seems only fair.
I understand how some people object to same-sex marriage on religious grounds, but we're living in a country with a clear separation of church and state. What one religion believes -- and there's some debate about that, as recent back-and-forth articles on these pages can attest -- should not dictate to everyone. As I recall, about half the country did not want civil rights for blacks in the 1960s (some people still don't), but that became the law of the land because it was the right thing to do.
We've solicited readers' opinions about same-sex marriage for a feature that will run next week, and we've had a number of responses from both sides of the issue. As a preview, I'd like to share a favorite one, from Ronald Kracht of Windsor:
"One of the things I have learned in the past 35 years is that no other relationship, happy or unhappy, married or unmarried, straight or gay, has any impact on the strength or sanctity of my marriage. I don't believe that any 'separate but equal' institution is warranted or appropriate. Any religious body which chooses not to approve of same-sex marriage should be allowed to refuse to perform such marriages."
I could not have said it better myself.
Neither could I.
July 18, 2007
"Corporate America: The New Gay Activists"
From Yahoo/The Huffington Post by way of PageOneQ
In a recent study by Gallup, almost ninety percent of Americans said they believe gay people should have equal rights in the workplace. Interestingly, only forty-seven percent of these same people believe that being gay is "morally acceptable." So what has convinced nearly nine out of ten people across the country that gays and lesbians deserve equality at work even when they don't believe gay is OK? Charting a course unplanned but nevertheless successful, Corporate America is shaping up to be the most persuasive gay activists of the decade.
How are they doing it? With a simple three-step formula: credibility + education + action. It's a winning combination that actually fuels progress toward achieving equality in other arenas including politically charged topics like same-sex marriage. Having recently returned from a speaking tour that included stops at some of the most historically conservative firms in the country, I found that Corporate America's message supporting the rights of their gay employees is transcending political, economic and even religious barriers.
While many veteran activists will scream and yell over this shift in battlefields from outside the establishment to inside the establishment, a new era of gay activism has dawned. Thanks in large part to Corporate America, the road to anti-gay hate crimes, same-sex marriage, and even gay adoption may already be paved. Not through Washington, but through Wall Street. After all, they've convinced nine out of ten people that gay people deserve to be treated fairly at work so why not speed things up and make the most out of their successful formula. The G Suite folks seem to have the right idea, capitalize on the rising profile of gay people in business and help them up the corporate ladder to the top office. An out-of-the-closet CEO of any blue-chip company will be a watershed day for gay equality. More than likely, all of those other watershed days we've been waiting for will then simply fall into place.
Having spent 30 years in the business world myself (I started telecommuting from my playpen), one thing I've learned and had reinforced time and time again is that business does what's good for business. If it helps anyone else, that's a bouns. If GLBT equality is good for business, and this trend clearly shows that it is, wouldn't it make sense that it should be good for other areas of society?
In a recent study by Gallup, almost ninety percent of Americans said they believe gay people should have equal rights in the workplace. Interestingly, only forty-seven percent of these same people believe that being gay is "morally acceptable." So what has convinced nearly nine out of ten people across the country that gays and lesbians deserve equality at work even when they don't believe gay is OK? Charting a course unplanned but nevertheless successful, Corporate America is shaping up to be the most persuasive gay activists of the decade.
How are they doing it? With a simple three-step formula: credibility + education + action. It's a winning combination that actually fuels progress toward achieving equality in other arenas including politically charged topics like same-sex marriage. Having recently returned from a speaking tour that included stops at some of the most historically conservative firms in the country, I found that Corporate America's message supporting the rights of their gay employees is transcending political, economic and even religious barriers.
While many veteran activists will scream and yell over this shift in battlefields from outside the establishment to inside the establishment, a new era of gay activism has dawned. Thanks in large part to Corporate America, the road to anti-gay hate crimes, same-sex marriage, and even gay adoption may already be paved. Not through Washington, but through Wall Street. After all, they've convinced nine out of ten people that gay people deserve to be treated fairly at work so why not speed things up and make the most out of their successful formula. The G Suite folks seem to have the right idea, capitalize on the rising profile of gay people in business and help them up the corporate ladder to the top office. An out-of-the-closet CEO of any blue-chip company will be a watershed day for gay equality. More than likely, all of those other watershed days we've been waiting for will then simply fall into place.
Having spent 30 years in the business world myself (I started telecommuting from my playpen), one thing I've learned and had reinforced time and time again is that business does what's good for business. If it helps anyone else, that's a bouns. If GLBT equality is good for business, and this trend clearly shows that it is, wouldn't it make sense that it should be good for other areas of society?
Focus on the Family Works to Keep Hate Alive
In their latest step to protect their right to be hateful bigots, Focus on the Family's CitizenLink aired a snarky video, trying their best to demean the entire concept of hate crimes.
Thanks to Good As You, here's the link. If you even casually care about GLBT rights, prepare to get really aggravated if you watch it.
If you don't want to raise your bloodpressure too much, here's the summary, quoted by Good As You:
Judges have enough work to do just figuring out who did what to whom, without having to figure out what "who" was thinking when they did "what" to "whom."
If we’re going to have equal justice for all, it needs to be based on what "who" did. Which shines the light on a simple truth; hate crimes legislation is not really about hate or crime. What it’s really about is getting the federal government to grant civil rights status to a particular behavior. Which is the off-ramp that leads to the end of marriage and family.
Let that last sentence sink in for a moment so you can appreciate how absurd it is.
Don't dismiss it, though. As I've said before, people really believe this crap.
I really like the point made by Good As You; imagine this piece running if you substituted "black" or "christian" for "gay" victim regarding this issue.
Radio stations would be pulling the good Dr. Dobson off the air faster that you can say good riddance.
Sort of emphasizes why we need the legislation in the first place, doesn't it?
Thanks to Good As You, here's the link. If you even casually care about GLBT rights, prepare to get really aggravated if you watch it.
If you don't want to raise your bloodpressure too much, here's the summary, quoted by Good As You:
Judges have enough work to do just figuring out who did what to whom, without having to figure out what "who" was thinking when they did "what" to "whom."
If we’re going to have equal justice for all, it needs to be based on what "who" did. Which shines the light on a simple truth; hate crimes legislation is not really about hate or crime. What it’s really about is getting the federal government to grant civil rights status to a particular behavior. Which is the off-ramp that leads to the end of marriage and family.
Let that last sentence sink in for a moment so you can appreciate how absurd it is.
Don't dismiss it, though. As I've said before, people really believe this crap.
I really like the point made by Good As You; imagine this piece running if you substituted "black" or "christian" for "gay" victim regarding this issue.
Radio stations would be pulling the good Dr. Dobson off the air faster that you can say good riddance.
Sort of emphasizes why we need the legislation in the first place, doesn't it?
July 17, 2007
We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us
If you remember that line from the old "Pogo" cartoon, you're dating yourself, but that can be our little secret. That's the point made by this column on The Bilerico Project by guest writer Michael Crawford (an African-American activist, not the Broadway singer).
Crawford is concerned with the amount of infighting he sees among progressive LGBT activists right now, especially with the hate crimes bill ready to come up for a vote in the Senate. Crawford feels important resources and energy is being diverted from that lobbying effort to debate/complain about the structure of the upcoming Democratic presidential debate devoted to LGBT issues.
This just goes to show that we are not nearly as politically sophisticated as we would like to believe ourselves to be and that our activism is steeped in personal self-expression rather than a focus on political effectiveness. We have the best chance ever of getting a major piece of LGBT legislation through both chambers of Congress and instead of fighting tooth and nail to make it, some of are engaged in another round on intramural bloodletting under the guise of holding organizations "accountable."
This forum is a sign of our growing political strength and, yes, some credit should go to HRC for the work that it has done over the years in a hostile political environment to build that political strength. Rather than simply attacking our national organizations, we should be focused on how we can help to make them better, faster, stronger and more effective. The homo-haters at Focus on the Family alone have a budget that is larger than HRC, NGLTF, SLDN, GLAAD, Lambda Legal, National Black Justice Coalition and GLSEN combined. And that's just one of the organizations that the religious right has built over the years to obliterate us.
Of course, every political organization or interest group has disagreement and infighting, but that hurts a minority group like GLBT activists harder because their resources, although stronger than they used to be, pale in comparision to some of their more aggressive opponents, as Crawford points out.
While I was disappointed at the makeup of the panel, I think it is important to see the upcoming LOGO debate as a starting point and not the end destination. Hopefully this will be the beginning of a trend, not a unique, one-time event. I feel it would be more benefitial for GLBT activists to focus on finding a way to be supportive of this event, then seeking improvements for the next one.
Energy and resources need to be spent on reaching equality for GLBT people, not in pushing individual agendas.
Crawford is concerned with the amount of infighting he sees among progressive LGBT activists right now, especially with the hate crimes bill ready to come up for a vote in the Senate. Crawford feels important resources and energy is being diverted from that lobbying effort to debate/complain about the structure of the upcoming Democratic presidential debate devoted to LGBT issues.
This just goes to show that we are not nearly as politically sophisticated as we would like to believe ourselves to be and that our activism is steeped in personal self-expression rather than a focus on political effectiveness. We have the best chance ever of getting a major piece of LGBT legislation through both chambers of Congress and instead of fighting tooth and nail to make it, some of are engaged in another round on intramural bloodletting under the guise of holding organizations "accountable."
This forum is a sign of our growing political strength and, yes, some credit should go to HRC for the work that it has done over the years in a hostile political environment to build that political strength. Rather than simply attacking our national organizations, we should be focused on how we can help to make them better, faster, stronger and more effective. The homo-haters at Focus on the Family alone have a budget that is larger than HRC, NGLTF, SLDN, GLAAD, Lambda Legal, National Black Justice Coalition and GLSEN combined. And that's just one of the organizations that the religious right has built over the years to obliterate us.
Of course, every political organization or interest group has disagreement and infighting, but that hurts a minority group like GLBT activists harder because their resources, although stronger than they used to be, pale in comparision to some of their more aggressive opponents, as Crawford points out.
While I was disappointed at the makeup of the panel, I think it is important to see the upcoming LOGO debate as a starting point and not the end destination. Hopefully this will be the beginning of a trend, not a unique, one-time event. I feel it would be more benefitial for GLBT activists to focus on finding a way to be supportive of this event, then seeking improvements for the next one.
Energy and resources need to be spent on reaching equality for GLBT people, not in pushing individual agendas.
July 16, 2007
"Gay Christians Reclaim the Bible"
I was delighted to find an article with that title in a gay newspaper, "The Edge," published and distributed in Boston, Massachusetts. Here's an excerpt:
The Bible has been used, early and often, to attack civil parity for GLBT people, especially in terms of marriage equality. But other points of view are possible, say gay-friendly congregations.
A Boston Globe article from last November addresses this topic, quoting Rev. Jeff Miner or the Jesus Metropolitan Community Church.
"Most people think that the attitude of gay Christians is, ’Who cares what the Bible says?’ when in reality, we care deeply what the Bible says," says Miner, a pastor with the GLBT-friendly, Indianapolis-based church, who led a forum on the issue last November at the Arlington Street Church.
Continued Miner, "We think there are a lot of powerful, affirming things that are in the Bible that have been ignored."
Miner and co-author John Tyler Connoley wrote the book, or at least a book, on the subject; in 2002, The Children Are Free: Reexamining the Biblical Evidence on Same-Sex Relationships was published by the Jesus Metropolitan Community Church.
Miner and Connoley look at both Old and New Testaments for source material to bolster their argument that not only are GLBT people God’s children, too, but that in fact they are exactly who and what God intended for them to be.
Their book "The Children Are Free" is an outstanding book, one of the ones I used when I first started attending a gay affirming church and needed to put my arms around God's acceptance of GLBT people. I strongly recommend it to anyone who is interested in serious studying that issue.
But it’s the behavior of heterosexual Christians that concern some people. The Globe article quoted Pam Garramone, executive director of Greater Boston Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, which sponsored the forum at the Arlington Street Church.
Garramone related how she had received a phone call from a distraught mother whose husband had exiled their daughter from the family home for being a lesbian.
Recounted Garramone, "She said, ’My instinct is to love and accept her, but I can’t because my church won’t let me.’"
Continued Garramone, "That’s the kind of parent who needs to hear this message--you don’t have to choose your child over your religion."
There is no choice needed--God loves gay people just as much as he does straights without changing them.
Click here to read some of the examples Miner and Connoley included in their book from The Edge's article.
The Bible has been used, early and often, to attack civil parity for GLBT people, especially in terms of marriage equality. But other points of view are possible, say gay-friendly congregations.
A Boston Globe article from last November addresses this topic, quoting Rev. Jeff Miner or the Jesus Metropolitan Community Church.
"Most people think that the attitude of gay Christians is, ’Who cares what the Bible says?’ when in reality, we care deeply what the Bible says," says Miner, a pastor with the GLBT-friendly, Indianapolis-based church, who led a forum on the issue last November at the Arlington Street Church.
Continued Miner, "We think there are a lot of powerful, affirming things that are in the Bible that have been ignored."
Miner and co-author John Tyler Connoley wrote the book, or at least a book, on the subject; in 2002, The Children Are Free: Reexamining the Biblical Evidence on Same-Sex Relationships was published by the Jesus Metropolitan Community Church.
Miner and Connoley look at both Old and New Testaments for source material to bolster their argument that not only are GLBT people God’s children, too, but that in fact they are exactly who and what God intended for them to be.
Their book "The Children Are Free" is an outstanding book, one of the ones I used when I first started attending a gay affirming church and needed to put my arms around God's acceptance of GLBT people. I strongly recommend it to anyone who is interested in serious studying that issue.
But it’s the behavior of heterosexual Christians that concern some people. The Globe article quoted Pam Garramone, executive director of Greater Boston Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, which sponsored the forum at the Arlington Street Church.
Garramone related how she had received a phone call from a distraught mother whose husband had exiled their daughter from the family home for being a lesbian.
Recounted Garramone, "She said, ’My instinct is to love and accept her, but I can’t because my church won’t let me.’"
Continued Garramone, "That’s the kind of parent who needs to hear this message--you don’t have to choose your child over your religion."
There is no choice needed--God loves gay people just as much as he does straights without changing them.
Click here to read some of the examples Miner and Connoley included in their book from The Edge's article.
Get Out of Reverse
A few weeks ago, I announced the ministry initiative Pastor Brenda and I are working to start up, the Affirming Christian Network. Check it out if you haven't already--we've recently posted a few new items there.
I've written my first essay for the ministry, "Get Out of Reverse:"
How many blessings have we missed because we were too fixated on our past to seek God’s plans for our future?I’m sure we’ve all also done things that we are ashamed of and that we have come to know were outside (sometimes waaaaaay outside) God’s will. The Apostle Paul certainly did. Before his career change, he was one of the most zealous persecutors of Christians, even killing some of them. If you ever doubt whether God can use you to serve his kingdom, just think of Paul.
Click here to read "Get Out of Reverse."
I've written my first essay for the ministry, "Get Out of Reverse:"
How many blessings have we missed because we were too fixated on our past to seek God’s plans for our future?I’m sure we’ve all also done things that we are ashamed of and that we have come to know were outside (sometimes waaaaaay outside) God’s will. The Apostle Paul certainly did. Before his career change, he was one of the most zealous persecutors of Christians, even killing some of them. If you ever doubt whether God can use you to serve his kingdom, just think of Paul.
Click here to read "Get Out of Reverse."
July 15, 2007
Brighten The Corner Where You Are
Don't be content to sit on the back pew. Don't be afraid to have your voice heard in your church. If your church doesn't want to hear your voice because you are gay, find a place that does. That's what I gleaned out of an excellent essay on Whosoever by Lori Heine.
Most of us are searching for a place where our unique, individual talents can be made useful. We want to be recognized. We need to be appreciated. And so we search on and on, following the passion for Christ that God has placed in our hearts. We are so accustomed to being unwelcome that when we find a church in which we are welcome, the pressure we feel to go along to get along - even if it compromises much of what we believe - can be overwhelming.
Those of us who choose to stand up for orthodoxy and tradition, within a church or denomination that welcomes us (and thinks that ought to be enough), can find ourselves plunked down smack on the opposite side of the fence from those who support our inclusion. We may be driven, by conscience, to stand beside the very people who oppose our welcome. Our usual allies may react as if we have betrayed them. What all too often occurs to nobody else is that, for GLBT Christians to have genuine freedom of worship, we must follow our convictions regardless of who else in the church likes it and who doesn't. We owe our loyalty, after all, not to any particular faction within the church, but to God.
Wherever in the church's theological and political spectrum you happen to decide you belong, make sure you make your membership matter. Make your voice heard. Don't let anybody shame or guilt you into compliance with anything you cannot support in good conscience or respect. The Holy Spirit may indeed take you somewhere very far from the tradition in which you were raised. But it makes a great deal of difference whether you go there because it genuinely seems right to you, or whether it is because you have been made, by those whose acceptance of you is strictly conditional, to feel that you must in order to please them.
Click here to read the rest of the essay on Whosoever.
We are ALL an important part of God's kingdom, and he has plans for how He wants to use ALL of us in his Kingdom. Seek out those plans and find the place where He wants to use you.
Most of us are searching for a place where our unique, individual talents can be made useful. We want to be recognized. We need to be appreciated. And so we search on and on, following the passion for Christ that God has placed in our hearts. We are so accustomed to being unwelcome that when we find a church in which we are welcome, the pressure we feel to go along to get along - even if it compromises much of what we believe - can be overwhelming.
Those of us who choose to stand up for orthodoxy and tradition, within a church or denomination that welcomes us (and thinks that ought to be enough), can find ourselves plunked down smack on the opposite side of the fence from those who support our inclusion. We may be driven, by conscience, to stand beside the very people who oppose our welcome. Our usual allies may react as if we have betrayed them. What all too often occurs to nobody else is that, for GLBT Christians to have genuine freedom of worship, we must follow our convictions regardless of who else in the church likes it and who doesn't. We owe our loyalty, after all, not to any particular faction within the church, but to God.
Wherever in the church's theological and political spectrum you happen to decide you belong, make sure you make your membership matter. Make your voice heard. Don't let anybody shame or guilt you into compliance with anything you cannot support in good conscience or respect. The Holy Spirit may indeed take you somewhere very far from the tradition in which you were raised. But it makes a great deal of difference whether you go there because it genuinely seems right to you, or whether it is because you have been made, by those whose acceptance of you is strictly conditional, to feel that you must in order to please them.
Click here to read the rest of the essay on Whosoever.
We are ALL an important part of God's kingdom, and he has plans for how He wants to use ALL of us in his Kingdom. Seek out those plans and find the place where He wants to use you.
Here's What We're Up Against
By we, I mean folks like the ones I work with in ministry efforts to reach out to GLBT people. Some of them/you have been sooooo hurt and damaged by people preaching their misguided interpretation of God's word, or just using the Lord to justify their own hate and bigotry. Here's an excerpt from a fairly innocuous blog post I ran across earlier that weighed heavily on me during worship today.
From the post "What Would We Do Without Christians?"
Sometimes I wonder to myself if church aren't just meeting places for horrible people rather than places of worship and repentance. I've read the Bible and Jesus sure says a lot about not creating a fuss, being pious, honest and civil. He talks of neighbourliness and kindness. When was the last time I saw a Christian who had truly accepted these ideals? I honestly can't remember. Go around the internet and read what Christians write... mostly it's hateful, dishonest and distasteful. Grr...
While I think this generalization reaches too far, we've all seen people, perhaps even congregations, that fit this description. I'm sure the young man who wrote this has experience to back up his feelings.
This perspective, from my experience, both direct and anecdotal, is very deeply ingrained into a large part of the GLBT community. That is why I believe it is so important for churches that are affirming and accepting to move beyond their four walls and reach out to people like Jae, not by hitting him over the head with the same Bible he's already been beaten up with but by showing the kind of love, acceptance, and humility that he associates with Christ but not with Christians.
Do you know that wonderful old hymn "They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love?" I can understand how GLBT people could scoff at that, wanting to make the last word of the title hate instead of love.
We need to show the unchurched GLBT community Jesus' love, and the only way they can see it is through the love, not hate and condemnation, of His people.
From the post "What Would We Do Without Christians?"
Sometimes I wonder to myself if church aren't just meeting places for horrible people rather than places of worship and repentance. I've read the Bible and Jesus sure says a lot about not creating a fuss, being pious, honest and civil. He talks of neighbourliness and kindness. When was the last time I saw a Christian who had truly accepted these ideals? I honestly can't remember. Go around the internet and read what Christians write... mostly it's hateful, dishonest and distasteful. Grr...
While I think this generalization reaches too far, we've all seen people, perhaps even congregations, that fit this description. I'm sure the young man who wrote this has experience to back up his feelings.
This perspective, from my experience, both direct and anecdotal, is very deeply ingrained into a large part of the GLBT community. That is why I believe it is so important for churches that are affirming and accepting to move beyond their four walls and reach out to people like Jae, not by hitting him over the head with the same Bible he's already been beaten up with but by showing the kind of love, acceptance, and humility that he associates with Christ but not with Christians.
Do you know that wonderful old hymn "They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love?" I can understand how GLBT people could scoff at that, wanting to make the last word of the title hate instead of love.
We need to show the unchurched GLBT community Jesus' love, and the only way they can see it is through the love, not hate and condemnation, of His people.
July 14, 2007
Coverage of a City's First "Gay" Church
The Metropolitan Community Church continues its international outreach by opening a new church in Worcester, England. According to this report by the Worcester News, it's the first of its kind in that city.
Rev Chris Dowd, an Australian who came to the UK 12 years ago and who is leading the services, said: "It's appalling that there simply isn't a place where openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people can come to church and be accepted for who they are. For a substantial number of gay and lesbian people spirituality is very important.
"There is a difference between being tolerant of sexuality and celebrating it."
He said: "The church is on the liberal side but people don't have to be gay to come to it. Some gay people feel that they are expected to sit at the back of the church and say nothing.
"The fact that people don't see a need for a gay church is the problem. A lot of people who attend the church have been on the receiving end of bigotry from people. Most people in my church - particularly the gays and lesbians - have suffered terrible stress from other denominations and feel they can't worship freely.
As I've written before, I don't want to be tolerated, I want to be accepted for who I am. If I were gay, I would seek no less but often be disappointed. ALL people deserve to have a church where they can go to worship God in the fullness of the Holy Spirit and the fullness of who they are as individuals. To accomplish the first part of that, I strongly believe one needs to be able to do the second part.
This is one of the primary reasons that here in the U. S. there are still many churches that are primarily African-American. Historically, they needed their own churches to not feel like second-class citizens in congregations controlled by white people. It's hard not to see the irony in the fact that "gay" houses of worship and GLBT activists face some of their stiffest opposition from the leaders of those African-American churches.
I put "gay" in quotes here because, though I understand why these churches are described that way, I don't believe it's accurate. That phrase implices the exclusion of anyone who is not gay, and I have not found that to be the case.
When I first started attending Believers Covenant Fellowship, I was warmly received and accepted, not tolerated, even though it would fall under the "gay church" classification and I was a straight man. I have bonded with these wonderful people and call them "my strange little church family." They have loved me and helped me grow in my walk with God, and I have enjoyed poking fun at them as they have at me over our differences.
To me, congregations like BCF are not "gay churches," they are accepting and affirming.
Shouldn't all our places of worship be like that, regardless of race and/or sexual orientation.
After all, God is.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
Rev Chris Dowd, an Australian who came to the UK 12 years ago and who is leading the services, said: "It's appalling that there simply isn't a place where openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people can come to church and be accepted for who they are. For a substantial number of gay and lesbian people spirituality is very important.
"There is a difference between being tolerant of sexuality and celebrating it."
He said: "The church is on the liberal side but people don't have to be gay to come to it. Some gay people feel that they are expected to sit at the back of the church and say nothing.
"The fact that people don't see a need for a gay church is the problem. A lot of people who attend the church have been on the receiving end of bigotry from people. Most people in my church - particularly the gays and lesbians - have suffered terrible stress from other denominations and feel they can't worship freely.
As I've written before, I don't want to be tolerated, I want to be accepted for who I am. If I were gay, I would seek no less but often be disappointed. ALL people deserve to have a church where they can go to worship God in the fullness of the Holy Spirit and the fullness of who they are as individuals. To accomplish the first part of that, I strongly believe one needs to be able to do the second part.
This is one of the primary reasons that here in the U. S. there are still many churches that are primarily African-American. Historically, they needed their own churches to not feel like second-class citizens in congregations controlled by white people. It's hard not to see the irony in the fact that "gay" houses of worship and GLBT activists face some of their stiffest opposition from the leaders of those African-American churches.
I put "gay" in quotes here because, though I understand why these churches are described that way, I don't believe it's accurate. That phrase implices the exclusion of anyone who is not gay, and I have not found that to be the case.
When I first started attending Believers Covenant Fellowship, I was warmly received and accepted, not tolerated, even though it would fall under the "gay church" classification and I was a straight man. I have bonded with these wonderful people and call them "my strange little church family." They have loved me and helped me grow in my walk with God, and I have enjoyed poking fun at them as they have at me over our differences.
To me, congregations like BCF are not "gay churches," they are accepting and affirming.
Shouldn't all our places of worship be like that, regardless of race and/or sexual orientation.
After all, God is.
Thanks to PageOneQ for the tip.
Knowing You Are Is Worth the Cost
That's the moral of the story told by the life of Brandon Kneefel, a 20 year-old in Michigan. From the Detroit Free Press:
"I was 14 when my parents asked me if I was gay," said Kneefel, who was born in Dearborn and raised in Livonia. "I said that I was, and they immediately wanted to get me counseling."
For Kneefel, a popular student who holds track and field records at Livonia's Stevenson High School, it should have been a relief finally to acknowledge outwardly what he'd felt inside since he was 4. Instead, it unleashed a nightmare.
His family was humiliated and repulsed by his homosexuality. They objected to him running for student body president, fearing he would negatively influence other students. They didn't want him to play football for similar reasons.
"All I saw was their fear," he said.
Click on the link above to read the rest of the story. Amazingly, it is one of validation, not tragedy.
"I was 14 when my parents asked me if I was gay," said Kneefel, who was born in Dearborn and raised in Livonia. "I said that I was, and they immediately wanted to get me counseling."
For Kneefel, a popular student who holds track and field records at Livonia's Stevenson High School, it should have been a relief finally to acknowledge outwardly what he'd felt inside since he was 4. Instead, it unleashed a nightmare.
His family was humiliated and repulsed by his homosexuality. They objected to him running for student body president, fearing he would negatively influence other students. They didn't want him to play football for similar reasons.
"All I saw was their fear," he said.
Click on the link above to read the rest of the story. Amazingly, it is one of validation, not tragedy.
July 13, 2007
"David Vitter, Another Victim of Gay Marriage"
If you've been watching the news in recent days (always a dangerous proposition), you've probably heard of the latest right winger to get caught with his zipper down, Louisiana Senator David Vitter. His phone number showed up on the recently released records of a Washington, DC "madam," who he contacted to obtain the services of a prostitute. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, the Christian Coalition had rated Vitter 100% for his pro-family voting record.
Here is a clever tounge-in-cheek essay by Jon Swift, who blames the whole mess on gay marriage. The post is good, and so are some of the comments although someone took the essay far too seriously.
I link to these type of stories because I have a sarcastic sense of humor and more so because writings like this help point out how absurd the whole "gay marriage will destroy society" is when put in the context of a real situation. Here's a taste of the essay:
Though it is very magnanimous of Vitter to accept responsibility for his transgressions, is he really to blame? After the Hollywood left redefined marriage, it must have been a very difficult and confusing time for him. The failure of the passage of the Federal Marriage Amendment must have taken a severe toll on him as he struggled to figure out what marriage really is if even gays can do it. As he grappled with the issue, is it any surprise that he found solace in the embrace of a disinterested paid companion?
Sadly, you just KNOW there are some nitwits out there who actually believe this.
Here is a clever tounge-in-cheek essay by Jon Swift, who blames the whole mess on gay marriage. The post is good, and so are some of the comments although someone took the essay far too seriously.
I link to these type of stories because I have a sarcastic sense of humor and more so because writings like this help point out how absurd the whole "gay marriage will destroy society" is when put in the context of a real situation. Here's a taste of the essay:
Though it is very magnanimous of Vitter to accept responsibility for his transgressions, is he really to blame? After the Hollywood left redefined marriage, it must have been a very difficult and confusing time for him. The failure of the passage of the Federal Marriage Amendment must have taken a severe toll on him as he struggled to figure out what marriage really is if even gays can do it. As he grappled with the issue, is it any surprise that he found solace in the embrace of a disinterested paid companion?
Sadly, you just KNOW there are some nitwits out there who actually believe this.
Featured Organization: The Naming Project
Ross from the website In Lay Terms gave me a heads up about a wonderful organization he works with in the Minneapolis area called The Naming Project. The following is from their website:
The Naming Project is a faith-based youth group serving youth of all sexual and gender identities. The primary focus is to provide a place for youth who are gay/lesbian/bisexual/ transgender/ queer/questioning to learn, grow, and share their experiences. In this way The Naming Project is a space in which youth can comfortably discuss faith and who they understand themselves to be--whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender...or straight.
The Naming Project is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It is a mission and outreach of Bethany Lutheran Church in the Seward neighborhood. However, The Naming Project reaches out to youth across the United States through its programs.
Programs of The Naming Project Include:
* Local meetings on Sunday evenings in Minneapolis
* Outings to Worship and Fellowship Experiences
* E-mail check-ins and resources for youth and parents
* Workshops and conversations for youth in schools, communities, and churches
* Workshops for youth workers, parents, and congregations
* A five-day summer camp for youth
There is also a film about the camp titled Camp Out that will premier on the LOGO network on Saturday, July 28th.
I think this kind of work is so very important. One of the biggest issues I've run across in the GLBT community is the difficulty people have in unlearning who they thought they were supposed to be and coming to understand who they really are. Groups like this can help avoid much of that pain by encouraging youth to accept who they are at an earlier age and learn to love themselves and others.
If you know of an organization that is working for the benefit of the GLBT community, please let me know at straight_notnarrow@yahoo.com and I'll be happy to feature them here.
The Naming Project is a faith-based youth group serving youth of all sexual and gender identities. The primary focus is to provide a place for youth who are gay/lesbian/bisexual/ transgender/ queer/questioning to learn, grow, and share their experiences. In this way The Naming Project is a space in which youth can comfortably discuss faith and who they understand themselves to be--whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender...or straight.
The Naming Project is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It is a mission and outreach of Bethany Lutheran Church in the Seward neighborhood. However, The Naming Project reaches out to youth across the United States through its programs.
Programs of The Naming Project Include:
* Local meetings on Sunday evenings in Minneapolis
* Outings to Worship and Fellowship Experiences
* E-mail check-ins and resources for youth and parents
* Workshops and conversations for youth in schools, communities, and churches
* Workshops for youth workers, parents, and congregations
* A five-day summer camp for youth
There is also a film about the camp titled Camp Out that will premier on the LOGO network on Saturday, July 28th.
I think this kind of work is so very important. One of the biggest issues I've run across in the GLBT community is the difficulty people have in unlearning who they thought they were supposed to be and coming to understand who they really are. Groups like this can help avoid much of that pain by encouraging youth to accept who they are at an earlier age and learn to love themselves and others.
If you know of an organization that is working for the benefit of the GLBT community, please let me know at straight_notnarrow@yahoo.com and I'll be happy to feature them here.
July 12, 2007
The U. S. As a Safe Haven for GLBT People
As I've chronicled here over time, even with the limitations on civil rights GLBT face in the United States, there are many nations where the situation is much, much worse. That makes the U. S. an attractive destination for seeking political asylum, according to the Washington Post.
Harassment and abuse of gay men and lesbians is becoming increasingly accepted as grounds for legal asylum in the United States, even at a time of conservative judicial activism, fear about HIV/AIDS transmission and increased scrutiny of asylum seekers. The government does not disclose a breakdown of reasons for granting asylum petitions, but legal advocacy groups in several major U.S. cities said they have won dozens of cases.
Homosexuality, once a de facto condition for barring foreigners from entering the country, is now officially recognized by the U.S. government as a category that might subject individuals to persecution in their homeland, just as if they were political dissidents in a dictatorship or religious minority members in a theocracy.
But although petitioning for asylum on the basis of sexual orientation has become far easier since 1994, when then-Attorney General Janet Reno ordered that a groundbreaking case involving a gay Cuban refugee be viewed as a legal precedent, such asylum cases are still extremely difficult to win, according to lawyers in Washington and elsewhere.
One reason is that applicants face multiple burdens of proof. They must demonstrate that they were abused or harassed by authorities, not merely by angry relatives or drunken hooligans, or that the authorities failed to protect them. They must also prove that they were abused because they are homosexual -- and thus prove that they are, in fact, gay.
It is still an uphill struggle for GBLT people to immigrate into the United States, and the organization Immigration Equality is working to improve that situation. Click on the link if you are interested in learning more about this issue.
Harassment and abuse of gay men and lesbians is becoming increasingly accepted as grounds for legal asylum in the United States, even at a time of conservative judicial activism, fear about HIV/AIDS transmission and increased scrutiny of asylum seekers. The government does not disclose a breakdown of reasons for granting asylum petitions, but legal advocacy groups in several major U.S. cities said they have won dozens of cases.
Homosexuality, once a de facto condition for barring foreigners from entering the country, is now officially recognized by the U.S. government as a category that might subject individuals to persecution in their homeland, just as if they were political dissidents in a dictatorship or religious minority members in a theocracy.
But although petitioning for asylum on the basis of sexual orientation has become far easier since 1994, when then-Attorney General Janet Reno ordered that a groundbreaking case involving a gay Cuban refugee be viewed as a legal precedent, such asylum cases are still extremely difficult to win, according to lawyers in Washington and elsewhere.
One reason is that applicants face multiple burdens of proof. They must demonstrate that they were abused or harassed by authorities, not merely by angry relatives or drunken hooligans, or that the authorities failed to protect them. They must also prove that they were abused because they are homosexual -- and thus prove that they are, in fact, gay.
It is still an uphill struggle for GBLT people to immigrate into the United States, and the organization Immigration Equality is working to improve that situation. Click on the link if you are interested in learning more about this issue.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu on Gay Rights
In case you missed this excerpt from a Vanity Fair article in which actor/activist Brad Pitt interviewed Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, here it is via the site Josh & Josh are Rich & Famous:
Brad Pitt: So certainly discrimination has no place in Christianity. There's a big argument going on in America right now, on gay rights and equality.
Desmond Tutu: For me, I couldn't ever keep quiet. I came from a situation where for a very long time people were discriminated against, made to suffer for something about which they could do nothing--their ethnicity. We were made to suffer because we were not white. Then, for a very long time in our church, we didn't ordain women, and we were penalizing a huge section of humanity for something about which they could do nothing--their gender. And I'm glad that now the church has changed all that. I'm glad that apartheid has ended. I could not for any part of me be able to keep quiet, because people were being penalized, ostracized, treated as if they were less than human, because of something they could do nothing to change--their sexual orientation. For me, I can't imagine the Lord that I worship, this Jesus Christ, actually concurring with the persecution of a minority that is already being persecuted. The Jesus who I worship is a Jesus who was forever on the side of those who were being clobbered, and he got into trouble precisely because of that. Our church, the Anglican Church, is experiencing a very, very serious crisis. It is all to do with human sexuality. I think God is weeping. He is weeping that we should be spending so much energy, time, resources on this subject at a time when the world is aching.
Brad Pitt: I couldn't agree with you more. Thank you for saying that.
I beileve that God does weep when His children are denied basic rights, especially when it is done in His name.
Brad Pitt: So certainly discrimination has no place in Christianity. There's a big argument going on in America right now, on gay rights and equality.
Desmond Tutu: For me, I couldn't ever keep quiet. I came from a situation where for a very long time people were discriminated against, made to suffer for something about which they could do nothing--their ethnicity. We were made to suffer because we were not white. Then, for a very long time in our church, we didn't ordain women, and we were penalizing a huge section of humanity for something about which they could do nothing--their gender. And I'm glad that now the church has changed all that. I'm glad that apartheid has ended. I could not for any part of me be able to keep quiet, because people were being penalized, ostracized, treated as if they were less than human, because of something they could do nothing to change--their sexual orientation. For me, I can't imagine the Lord that I worship, this Jesus Christ, actually concurring with the persecution of a minority that is already being persecuted. The Jesus who I worship is a Jesus who was forever on the side of those who were being clobbered, and he got into trouble precisely because of that. Our church, the Anglican Church, is experiencing a very, very serious crisis. It is all to do with human sexuality. I think God is weeping. He is weeping that we should be spending so much energy, time, resources on this subject at a time when the world is aching.
Brad Pitt: I couldn't agree with you more. Thank you for saying that.
I beileve that God does weep when His children are denied basic rights, especially when it is done in His name.
July 11, 2007
"50 Voices For Equality" In Oregon
From Basic Rights Oregon:
Today, the Basic Rights Education Fund launched a large-scale statewide, public education campaign, entitled" 50 Voices For Equality", a campaign made up of 50 straight Oregonians from ever corner of the state--who are standing up for GLBT equality.
The Fifty Voices for Equality website features biographies and statements of support for fairness in Oregon, as well as photos of the 50 Voices. Each of the Voices will engage in educational activities in their communities throughout 2007 and 2008. The campaign will include other educational components, to be launched in the coming months in combination with other campaigns.
The voices come from diverse perspectives, and include leading businesspeople, parents and grandparents, faith leaders, elected officials, community activists and public safety officers. Voices are geographically diverse as well, hailing from Bend, Philomath, Otis, Woodburn, Portland, Eugene, Baker City, Salem, Warm Springs, Hillsboro, Beaverton, Lincoln City, Ashland, Corvallis, Troutdale, Lake Oswego, The Dalles, Coos Bay, and Keizer.
We've also released a video to launch the campaign that we invite you to watch and share. Click here to watch the launch video!
Today, the Basic Rights Education Fund launched a large-scale statewide, public education campaign, entitled" 50 Voices For Equality", a campaign made up of 50 straight Oregonians from ever corner of the state--who are standing up for GLBT equality.
The Fifty Voices for Equality website features biographies and statements of support for fairness in Oregon, as well as photos of the 50 Voices. Each of the Voices will engage in educational activities in their communities throughout 2007 and 2008. The campaign will include other educational components, to be launched in the coming months in combination with other campaigns.
The voices come from diverse perspectives, and include leading businesspeople, parents and grandparents, faith leaders, elected officials, community activists and public safety officers. Voices are geographically diverse as well, hailing from Bend, Philomath, Otis, Woodburn, Portland, Eugene, Baker City, Salem, Warm Springs, Hillsboro, Beaverton, Lincoln City, Ashland, Corvallis, Troutdale, Lake Oswego, The Dalles, Coos Bay, and Keizer.
We've also released a video to launch the campaign that we invite you to watch and share. Click here to watch the launch video!
Homophobes Strike Out in San Diego
Last weekend, the San Diego Padres promoted "Floppy Hat Night" where they gave away about 12,000 floppy hats to children 14 and younger. That same night, the Gay Men's Chorus of San Diego sang the national anthem, and San Diego Pride purchased 1,000 tickets to the game.
This caused some local homophobes to get their knickers in a twist.
From the San Diego Union-Tribune's article:
Roughly 75 protesters showed up outside Petco Park's front gate dressed in red T-shirts emblazoned with the message “Save Our Kids.” They handed out fliers. A few attempted to talk with Padre fans as they arrived for the 5:05 p.m. game that was nationally televised on ESPN.
“We're here to inform parents, to warn them about what's happening inside (the ballpark),” said James Hartline, a self-described Christian activist who directed the protest. “Bringing together homosexuals with baseball and kids is beyond bounds. We're trying to get people to turn around, not go to the game, and we're succeeding.”
If so, it wasn't readily apparent. Official attendance for the game was 41,026, just short of a capacity crowd for the 42,685-seat ballpark.
Of course, if the American Family Association was staging the protest, they'd claim credit for the 1,659 empty seats, but that's a topic for another day.
“We are not boycotting. We are not protesting,” said J.D. Loveland, development director of Set Free Ministries, an El Cajon-based Christian organization that announced last month that it would withdraw its 42 workers from Petco concession stands for yesterday's game in objection.
The San Diego Gay Men's Chorus sings the National Anthem before Sunday night's Padres game against Atlanta.“Maybe it's just coincidence. Maybe it's just bad planning,” Loveland said. “But our bottom line is that Christian folk believe in the sanctity of marriage as stated in the Bible, one man and one woman. Homosexuality is a sin,and promoting it with a Pride Night when thousands of kids are also going to be (at the ballpark) is wrong. So we took a moral stand. We're not anti-gay. We're anti-anti-Christian.”
Local gay leaders responded with puzzlement, dismay and some anger.
“We're talking about a baseball game. That's all this is,” said Ron deHarte, executive director of San Diego Pride, which had purchased 1,000 tickets to yesterday's game, then advertised them on the group's Web site as “Out at the Park with the San Diego Padres, an official San Diego Pride event.”
Now which one of those two people made sense? That's a no-brainer. Everyone knows having gay men singing The Star-Spangled Banner and allowing gay people to buy tickets to a baseball game is anti-Christian, right?
Padres officials said the team was caught in the middle and that the convergence of events was a scheduling coincidence.
“San Diego Pride wanted to buy a block of tickets and chose this date, and they weren't the only ones,” Stieren said. “There are almost 100 groups at this game, more than 11,000 people. The Gay Men's Chorus sang the anthem because they applied, sent in a tape and we thought they were good. Beyond that, there's nothing else going on. People are making this bigger than it really is.”
Just in case you question that last statement, check out this e-mail blase sent out by Tony Perkins from the (Straight) Family Research Council:
This past Sunday, at the San Diego Padres baseball game, what was advertised as a "Free Floppy Hat Night" for kids under 14 turned out to be a double play. While the Padres management was enticing families with the giveaway for kids, it was also promoting the evening as a Gay Pride night at the ballpark. Children who received free hats were treated to the Gay Man's Chorus of San Diego singing the national anthem prior to what one homosexual group billed as "Out at the Park with the San Diego Padres."
The San Diego Padres organization should be ashamed that they would promote such an event on a night they specifically designed for the family. On this curveball of an evening, the Padres struck out.
Click the link below to contact the San Diego Padres and tell them that baseball is a family game that shouldn't be used as an exhibition of homosexual lifestyles. The national pastime is just that: an opportunity for fans of the sport to enjoy a game and take respite from the daily grind. It's not place for politics - or political correctness.
We've provided a short sample text you can sign or modify as you like to the Padres. Let's tell major league baseball to leave politics aside at the turnstile.
Thank you and God bless you.
As usual, Perkins doesn't let facts get in the way of his bigotry. As you can see from the newspaper story, the Padres did not promote that game as any type of "gay night." The way those type of events work is that the organization buys the tickets and then sells and promotes them theirselves.
I wonder exactly what homosexual lifestyles were exhibited at the stadium that night? Were gay men and lesbians making out and/or fornicating?
Of course not, they were simply watching a ball game and picking up a floppy hat for their kids.
This bothers folks like Perkins and groups like the Family Research Council because they just don't want gay people to do anything outside of the closet.
I do agree with Perkins on one thing--let's keep politics, especially your right-wing hate mongering, out of the ballpark and just let everyone enjoy their peanuts and Cracker Jacks in peace.
This caused some local homophobes to get their knickers in a twist.
From the San Diego Union-Tribune's article:
Roughly 75 protesters showed up outside Petco Park's front gate dressed in red T-shirts emblazoned with the message “Save Our Kids.” They handed out fliers. A few attempted to talk with Padre fans as they arrived for the 5:05 p.m. game that was nationally televised on ESPN.
“We're here to inform parents, to warn them about what's happening inside (the ballpark),” said James Hartline, a self-described Christian activist who directed the protest. “Bringing together homosexuals with baseball and kids is beyond bounds. We're trying to get people to turn around, not go to the game, and we're succeeding.”
If so, it wasn't readily apparent. Official attendance for the game was 41,026, just short of a capacity crowd for the 42,685-seat ballpark.
Of course, if the American Family Association was staging the protest, they'd claim credit for the 1,659 empty seats, but that's a topic for another day.
“We are not boycotting. We are not protesting,” said J.D. Loveland, development director of Set Free Ministries, an El Cajon-based Christian organization that announced last month that it would withdraw its 42 workers from Petco concession stands for yesterday's game in objection.
The San Diego Gay Men's Chorus sings the National Anthem before Sunday night's Padres game against Atlanta.“Maybe it's just coincidence. Maybe it's just bad planning,” Loveland said. “But our bottom line is that Christian folk believe in the sanctity of marriage as stated in the Bible, one man and one woman. Homosexuality is a sin,and promoting it with a Pride Night when thousands of kids are also going to be (at the ballpark) is wrong. So we took a moral stand. We're not anti-gay. We're anti-anti-Christian.”
Local gay leaders responded with puzzlement, dismay and some anger.
“We're talking about a baseball game. That's all this is,” said Ron deHarte, executive director of San Diego Pride, which had purchased 1,000 tickets to yesterday's game, then advertised them on the group's Web site as “Out at the Park with the San Diego Padres, an official San Diego Pride event.”
Now which one of those two people made sense? That's a no-brainer. Everyone knows having gay men singing The Star-Spangled Banner and allowing gay people to buy tickets to a baseball game is anti-Christian, right?
Padres officials said the team was caught in the middle and that the convergence of events was a scheduling coincidence.
“San Diego Pride wanted to buy a block of tickets and chose this date, and they weren't the only ones,” Stieren said. “There are almost 100 groups at this game, more than 11,000 people. The Gay Men's Chorus sang the anthem because they applied, sent in a tape and we thought they were good. Beyond that, there's nothing else going on. People are making this bigger than it really is.”
Just in case you question that last statement, check out this e-mail blase sent out by Tony Perkins from the (Straight) Family Research Council:
This past Sunday, at the San Diego Padres baseball game, what was advertised as a "Free Floppy Hat Night" for kids under 14 turned out to be a double play. While the Padres management was enticing families with the giveaway for kids, it was also promoting the evening as a Gay Pride night at the ballpark. Children who received free hats were treated to the Gay Man's Chorus of San Diego singing the national anthem prior to what one homosexual group billed as "Out at the Park with the San Diego Padres."
The San Diego Padres organization should be ashamed that they would promote such an event on a night they specifically designed for the family. On this curveball of an evening, the Padres struck out.
Click the link below to contact the San Diego Padres and tell them that baseball is a family game that shouldn't be used as an exhibition of homosexual lifestyles. The national pastime is just that: an opportunity for fans of the sport to enjoy a game and take respite from the daily grind. It's not place for politics - or political correctness.
We've provided a short sample text you can sign or modify as you like to the Padres. Let's tell major league baseball to leave politics aside at the turnstile.
Thank you and God bless you.
As usual, Perkins doesn't let facts get in the way of his bigotry. As you can see from the newspaper story, the Padres did not promote that game as any type of "gay night." The way those type of events work is that the organization buys the tickets and then sells and promotes them theirselves.
I wonder exactly what homosexual lifestyles were exhibited at the stadium that night? Were gay men and lesbians making out and/or fornicating?
Of course not, they were simply watching a ball game and picking up a floppy hat for their kids.
This bothers folks like Perkins and groups like the Family Research Council because they just don't want gay people to do anything outside of the closet.
I do agree with Perkins on one thing--let's keep politics, especially your right-wing hate mongering, out of the ballpark and just let everyone enjoy their peanuts and Cracker Jacks in peace.
July 10, 2007
The 13th Edition of the International Carnival of Pozitives Is Here
The folks over at ScribeSpirit are hosting the 13th edition of the International Carnival of Pozitives, the monthly gathering of uplifting stories about people who are HIV positive or whose lives have been impacted in other ways by the disease.
Next month I'm happy to say that the ICP will be hosted on this blog, so keep an eye out for that.
Next month I'm happy to say that the ICP will be hosted on this blog, so keep an eye out for that.
What Message Does Your Organization Have to Share?
I continue to look for ways to be a more effective adovcate for GLBT equality in politcs and the church.
One upgrade I am making to this blog is placing more of an emphasis (without reducing original content) to let people know of the action orgainzations, either local, national, or international, are taking to advocate for the GLBT community. The post below from the SLDN is an example of that.
I have signed up for a LOT of mailing lists over the last few months, but if you are a member of a group that I've missed and your mission matches up with the theme of this blog, please let me know. Also, even if I'm on your mailing list but you think I've missed something important, I'd like to hear about that also.
One thing I won't be doing is posting fund raising events. That's just not the mission of this blog. It's about issues, not money. I wish any and all advocacy groups much success in their fund raising efforts, but I don't want that to become a focus here. I hope you understand and respect that.
As I've contributed on occassions to other sites, if anyone, either as a representative of an organization or as a concerned individual, has something to say and would like it posted here, I am also open to that. I've posted a few items like that in the past and would love to include other voices here.
My e-mail is straight_notnarrow@yahoo.com.
One upgrade I am making to this blog is placing more of an emphasis (without reducing original content) to let people know of the action orgainzations, either local, national, or international, are taking to advocate for the GLBT community. The post below from the SLDN is an example of that.
I have signed up for a LOT of mailing lists over the last few months, but if you are a member of a group that I've missed and your mission matches up with the theme of this blog, please let me know. Also, even if I'm on your mailing list but you think I've missed something important, I'd like to hear about that also.
One thing I won't be doing is posting fund raising events. That's just not the mission of this blog. It's about issues, not money. I wish any and all advocacy groups much success in their fund raising efforts, but I don't want that to become a focus here. I hope you understand and respect that.
As I've contributed on occassions to other sites, if anyone, either as a representative of an organization or as a concerned individual, has something to say and would like it posted here, I am also open to that. I've posted a few items like that in the past and would love to include other voices here.
My e-mail is straight_notnarrow@yahoo.com.
Veterans: Tell SLDN Your Story
From the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network:
Every day, lesbian, gay, and bisexual American patriots are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan with honor, courage, and distinction. Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) seeks to honor their service by ending the discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.
Now, Congress needs to hear from those veterans of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is wrong.
An innovative new SLDN project, Stories From the Frontlines, will show Members of Congress that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is hurting our military by featuring the personal stories of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. This collection of veterans' stories will be a key tool in our work on Capitol Hill to educate Members of Congress and build support for the Military Readiness Enhancement Act (H.R. 1246), a bill that would repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban and replace it with a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Veterans: speak out and share your story! Click here to share your Story From the Frontlines.
All veterans of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are invited to share their experiences for Stories From the Frontlines. Veterans of all sexual orientations and gender identities, including straight allies and those whose careers were not directly harmed by "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," are welcome to join us in this exciting project.
Non-veterans are also crucial to the movement to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The ban on openly lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans serving in the military impacts every American in every community. Our freedoms are more secure when every qualified American is allowed to serve, regardless of sexual orientation. If you haven't already, click here to write Congress calling for the repeal of this discriminatory, unnecessary law.
Thank you for helping us honor all American patriots. Together, we will lift the ban!
Every day, lesbian, gay, and bisexual American patriots are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan with honor, courage, and distinction. Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) seeks to honor their service by ending the discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.
Now, Congress needs to hear from those veterans of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is wrong.
An innovative new SLDN project, Stories From the Frontlines, will show Members of Congress that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is hurting our military by featuring the personal stories of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. This collection of veterans' stories will be a key tool in our work on Capitol Hill to educate Members of Congress and build support for the Military Readiness Enhancement Act (H.R. 1246), a bill that would repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban and replace it with a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Veterans: speak out and share your story! Click here to share your Story From the Frontlines.
All veterans of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are invited to share their experiences for Stories From the Frontlines. Veterans of all sexual orientations and gender identities, including straight allies and those whose careers were not directly harmed by "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," are welcome to join us in this exciting project.
Non-veterans are also crucial to the movement to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The ban on openly lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans serving in the military impacts every American in every community. Our freedoms are more secure when every qualified American is allowed to serve, regardless of sexual orientation. If you haven't already, click here to write Congress calling for the repeal of this discriminatory, unnecessary law.
Thank you for helping us honor all American patriots. Together, we will lift the ban!
What Is the Ex-Gay Survivor Movement All About?
Peterson Toscano, one of the founders of the Beyond Ex-Gay community, addresses that in an entry on his blog.
We don't seek to bash people who identify as ex-gay or invalidate their experiences. Instead we wish to create a space to tell our own. The primary reason being for our own well being and recovery. Too often we shoved our ex-gay experiences in the closet believing that people in the LGBT community may just mock us for spending so much time, money and energy seeking to alter our sexuality. Some can be insensitive to personal and spiritual struggles that filled so much of our lives.
This weekend we saw the birth of the Ex-Gay Survivor Movement. It is a movement without a manifesto or agreed upon goals. Instead we have created a venue for people, who desperately sought to change and suppress their sexuality, an opportunity to unpack their experiences and to ask the essential questions--
Why did I pursue change? What was I looking for? What did I do to myself and let others do to me? What good came of the experiences I had? What harm came of it? How can I recover from these experiences and move on?
The Ex-Gay Survivor Movement--What's It All About? It is about speaking the truth in love. It is about seeking to tell our stories as honestly and vulnerably as possible. It is about telling our stories for our own well being. It is about telling our stories as a witness to the harm we see from a church and a world that insists that to be anything but straight is not good enough and what happens to the people who passionately follow that line of reasoning.
This movement is a radical departure from what some people expect. Even some gay activists are caught off guard by it and do not understand why many of us don't feel bitter and angry. Some conservative Christian groups, who do not know firsthand about the ex-gay struggle yet they insist it is the only route for same-sex attracted people, seem to feel threatened by the gathering of a handful of people who are willing to care for each other, listen deeply to each other and publicly tell our stories.
There is a mysterious power in telling our stories, and one thing is for sure, the Ex-Gay Survivor Movement is about standing up and telling our stories. I hope that the Church, ex-gay ministers and reparative therapists have ears to hear, and that they don't haggle over words and ultimately miss the point.
For there to be true communication, people need to not just hear but actually listen. That is a skill in desperately short supply in our society today, but the members of the Ex-Gay Survivor community deserve plenty of admiration and respect for opening their lives up for public inspection by sharing their stories in the hopes of saving others the pain they endured.
People just need to listen.
We don't seek to bash people who identify as ex-gay or invalidate their experiences. Instead we wish to create a space to tell our own. The primary reason being for our own well being and recovery. Too often we shoved our ex-gay experiences in the closet believing that people in the LGBT community may just mock us for spending so much time, money and energy seeking to alter our sexuality. Some can be insensitive to personal and spiritual struggles that filled so much of our lives.
This weekend we saw the birth of the Ex-Gay Survivor Movement. It is a movement without a manifesto or agreed upon goals. Instead we have created a venue for people, who desperately sought to change and suppress their sexuality, an opportunity to unpack their experiences and to ask the essential questions--
Why did I pursue change? What was I looking for? What did I do to myself and let others do to me? What good came of the experiences I had? What harm came of it? How can I recover from these experiences and move on?
The Ex-Gay Survivor Movement--What's It All About? It is about speaking the truth in love. It is about seeking to tell our stories as honestly and vulnerably as possible. It is about telling our stories for our own well being. It is about telling our stories as a witness to the harm we see from a church and a world that insists that to be anything but straight is not good enough and what happens to the people who passionately follow that line of reasoning.
This movement is a radical departure from what some people expect. Even some gay activists are caught off guard by it and do not understand why many of us don't feel bitter and angry. Some conservative Christian groups, who do not know firsthand about the ex-gay struggle yet they insist it is the only route for same-sex attracted people, seem to feel threatened by the gathering of a handful of people who are willing to care for each other, listen deeply to each other and publicly tell our stories.
There is a mysterious power in telling our stories, and one thing is for sure, the Ex-Gay Survivor Movement is about standing up and telling our stories. I hope that the Church, ex-gay ministers and reparative therapists have ears to hear, and that they don't haggle over words and ultimately miss the point.
For there to be true communication, people need to not just hear but actually listen. That is a skill in desperately short supply in our society today, but the members of the Ex-Gay Survivor community deserve plenty of admiration and respect for opening their lives up for public inspection by sharing their stories in the hopes of saving others the pain they endured.
People just need to listen.
July 09, 2007
What Is a Welcoming Congregation?
That's the topic adressed by Robert Cornwall, a pastor in California, in this essay. Pastor Cornwall had one idea of what a welcoming congregation was and how they should treat homosexuals.
Then his brother came out.
As often happens when an issue moves from the abstract to being personal, Pastor Cornwall approached the whole idea of welcome with a different sense of perspective:
I had to face some choices, including how I would read the scriptures. Experience is an important resource when we’re wrestling with difficult issues, and my new experience told me that my preconceived ideas needed to change. Moving from that personal transformation to providing leadership to a congregation that hasn’t dealt with the issue is a long, arduous and even dangerous trek, which is why many of us who have come to new understandings shy away from taking the next step.
Check out the rest of the essay to see how Pastor Cornwall is working to lead his church toward becoming a welcoming and affirming place of worship.
Then his brother came out.
As often happens when an issue moves from the abstract to being personal, Pastor Cornwall approached the whole idea of welcome with a different sense of perspective:
I had to face some choices, including how I would read the scriptures. Experience is an important resource when we’re wrestling with difficult issues, and my new experience told me that my preconceived ideas needed to change. Moving from that personal transformation to providing leadership to a congregation that hasn’t dealt with the issue is a long, arduous and even dangerous trek, which is why many of us who have come to new understandings shy away from taking the next step.
Check out the rest of the essay to see how Pastor Cornwall is working to lead his church toward becoming a welcoming and affirming place of worship.
July 08, 2007
A Personal Matter of Life and Death
I'm going to venture off topic with this post because, well, it's my blog.
Pastor Brenda and I have been operating with a heavy weight on our shoulders in recent weeks.
In May, not long after I recovered from complications following "routine" gallbladder surgery, Pastor Brenda went in for her annual mamogram.
They found a very small lump in her left breast.
They did a biopsy.
The biopsy showed some "bad cells," so they performed a lumpectomy, where they remove a portion of the tissue from inside the breast.
The pathology tests showed that there were four very, very small cancererous tumors.
They had to go back in and extract more tissue.
This is the part where our faith was being tested. We both felt that she would be completely healed, but we didn't know how big a price she would have to pay for that healing. After the third procedure, we waited to see if further treatment, likely radiation, would be needed.
Praise the Lord, it wasn't. The pathology (two days after we had been told to expect the results) came back clean. No more cancer, no more surgery or other treatment needed.
I post this for two reasons. First of all, that our passionate prayers were answered and Pastor Brenda will be fine.
Second, with her blessing, I want to point out the vital importance of early detection. If Brenda had skipped her annual exam, this cancer would have had plenty of time to get a good foothold, and her prognosis could have been much, much worse.
Unlike many of our laws, breast cancer does not discriminate based on a woman's sexual orientation.
I am linking to the Susan G. Komen Foundation's website, which contains a plethora of information about breast cancer. Pastor Brenda and I recently participated in the Race For The Cure in Washington, DC, and now that she is officially a breast cancer survivor, you can bet we'll be doing that as long as we are able. It was inspiring walking along with so many brave survivors who endured a lot more than Brenda had to.
So why did God allow my wife to be afflicted with those tumors? Perhaps so you could read about her story here. Perhaps she will meet someone in the future who needs to hear about the value of early detection.
I'm just glad she'll be around, whole and healthy, to do so.
Pastor Brenda and I have been operating with a heavy weight on our shoulders in recent weeks.
In May, not long after I recovered from complications following "routine" gallbladder surgery, Pastor Brenda went in for her annual mamogram.
They found a very small lump in her left breast.
They did a biopsy.
The biopsy showed some "bad cells," so they performed a lumpectomy, where they remove a portion of the tissue from inside the breast.
The pathology tests showed that there were four very, very small cancererous tumors.
They had to go back in and extract more tissue.
This is the part where our faith was being tested. We both felt that she would be completely healed, but we didn't know how big a price she would have to pay for that healing. After the third procedure, we waited to see if further treatment, likely radiation, would be needed.
Praise the Lord, it wasn't. The pathology (two days after we had been told to expect the results) came back clean. No more cancer, no more surgery or other treatment needed.
I post this for two reasons. First of all, that our passionate prayers were answered and Pastor Brenda will be fine.
Second, with her blessing, I want to point out the vital importance of early detection. If Brenda had skipped her annual exam, this cancer would have had plenty of time to get a good foothold, and her prognosis could have been much, much worse.
Unlike many of our laws, breast cancer does not discriminate based on a woman's sexual orientation.
I am linking to the Susan G. Komen Foundation's website, which contains a plethora of information about breast cancer. Pastor Brenda and I recently participated in the Race For The Cure in Washington, DC, and now that she is officially a breast cancer survivor, you can bet we'll be doing that as long as we are able. It was inspiring walking along with so many brave survivors who endured a lot more than Brenda had to.
So why did God allow my wife to be afflicted with those tumors? Perhaps so you could read about her story here. Perhaps she will meet someone in the future who needs to hear about the value of early detection.
I'm just glad she'll be around, whole and healthy, to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
