By ADAM NAGOURNEY
From the New York Times
Published: June 27, 2009
WASHINGTON — For 15 minutes in the Oval Office the other day, one of President Obama’s top campaign lieutenants, Steve Hildebrand, told the president about the “hurt, anxiety and anger” that he and other gay supporters felt over the slow pace of the White House’s engagement with gay issues.
The Stonewall Inn in New York City in 1969, days after a police raid set off demonstrations that are considered to be the start of the gay-rights movement.
Performers from Broadway and beyond commemorated the anniversary of the Stonewall riots on Thursday in Times Square.
But on Monday, 250 gay leaders are to join Mr. Obama in the East Room to commemorate publicly the 40th anniversary of the birth of the modern gay rights movement: a police raid on the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York. By contrast, the first time gay leaders were invited to the White House, in March 1977, they met a midlevel aide on a Saturday when the press and President Jimmy Carter were nowhere in sight.
The conflicting signals from the White House about its commitment to gay issues reflect a broader paradox: even as cultural acceptance of homosexuality increases across the country, the politics of gay rights remains full of crosscurrents.
It is reflected in the surge of gay men and lesbians on television and in public office, and in polls measuring a steady rise in support for gay rights measures. Despite approval in California of a ballot measure banning same-sex marriage, it has been authorized in six states.
Yet if the culture is moving on, national politics is not, or at least not as rapidly. Mr. Obama has yet to fulfill a campaign promise to repeal the policy barring openly gay people from serving in the military. The prospects that Congress will ever send him a bill overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman, appear dim. An effort to extend hate-crime legislation to include gay victims has produced a bitter backlash in some quarters: Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, sent a letter to clerics in his state arguing that it would be destructive to “faith, families and freedom.”
“America is changing more quickly than the government,” said Linda Ketner, a gay Democrat from South Carolina who came within four percentage points of winning a Congressional seat in November. “They are lagging behind the crowd. But if I remember my poli sci from college, isn’t that the way it always works?”
Some elected Democrats in Washington remain wary because they remember how conservatives used same-sex marriage and gay service in the military against them as political issues. The Obama White House in particular is reluctant to embrace gay rights issues now, officials there say, because they do not want to provide social conservatives a rallying cry while the president is trying to assemble legislative coalitions on health care and other initiatives.
Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, a group that opposes gay rights initiatives, said Mr. Obama’s reluctance to push more assertively for gay rights reflected public opinion.
“He’s given them a few minor concessions; they’re asking for more, such as ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ being repealed,” Mr. Perkins said. “The administration is not willing to go there, and I think there’s a reason for that, and that is because I think the American public isn’t there.”
Conservative Democrats have at best been unenthusiastic about efforts to push gay rights measures in Congress; 30 Democrats voted against a bill prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation that passed the House in 2007. (It died in the Senate.) And a half-dozen Democrats declined requests to discuss this issue, reflecting what aides called the complicated politics surrounding it.
Still, there are signs that the issue is not as pressing or toxic as it once was. “I don’t think it’s the political deal-breaker it once was,” said Dave Saunders, a southern Virginia Democratic consultant who has advised Democrats running for office in conservative rural areas. “Most people out here really don’t care because everybody has gay friends.”
Interviews with gay leaders suggest a consensus that there has been nothing short of a cultural transformation in the space of just a few years, even if it is reflected more in the evolving culture of the country than in the body of its laws.
“The diminution of the homophobia has been as important a phenomena as anything we’ve seen in the last 15 years,” said Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, who is gay.
Democrats now control the White House and both houses of Congress for the first time since 1994, increasing the chances of legislative action. Mr. Frank said that over the next two years, he expected Congress to overturn the ban on gay service in the military, pass legislation prohibiting discrimination against hiring gay workers, and extend the hate-crime bill to crimes involving gay couples.
There is also an emerging generational divide on gay issues — younger Americans tend to have more liberal positions — that has fueled what pollsters said was a measurable liberalization in views on gay rights over the past decade.
A New York Times/CBS News poll last spring found that 57 percent of people under 40 said they supported same-sex marriage, compared with 31 percent of respondents over 40. Andy Kohut, the president of the Pew Research Center, said the generational shift was reflected in his polling, in which the number of Americans opposing gay people serving openly in the military had dropped to 32 percent now from 45 percent in 1994.
David Axelrod, a senior Obama adviser, said, “You look at polling and attitudes among younger people on these issues are startlingly different than older people.”
“As generational change happens,” Mr. Axelrod added, “that’s going to be more and more true.”
In the view of many gay leaders, the shifts in public attitude are a validation of the central political goal set by the dozens of gay liberation groups that sprouted up in cities and on college campuses in the months after the Stonewall uprising: to have gay men and lesbians who had been living in secret go public as a way of dealing with societal fear and prejudice.
But there is considerable evidence that this is still an issue that stirs political concerns. Gay leaders have increasingly complained about what they call Mr. Obama’s slow pace in fulfilling promises he made during his campaign. Some boycotted a Democratic Party fund-raiser recently to show their distress.
“I have been really surprised how paralyzed they seem around this,” said Richard Socarides, who was an adviser to President Bill Clinton on gay issues.
Mr. Hildebrand did not respond to calls and e-mail messages asking about his encounter with Mr. Obama, which he described in a private e-mail forum for gay political leaders. (The meeting was confirmed by senior White House officials.)
Still, David Mixner, a longtime gay leader, said he was struck by how things had changed.
“Listen,” Mr. Mixner said, “in 1992, what we were begging Bill Clinton about — literally — about whether he was going to say the word ‘gay’ in his convention speech. Even say it. We had to threaten a walkout to get it in.”
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Frameline Film Fest: Cure For Love
Frameline Film Fest: Cure For Love
by Rita Hao
June 22, 2009 12:00 PM
Who knew there'd be a sellout crowd at the Roxie for the Frameline film festival's movies about the ex-gay movement on Saturday morning at 11 a.m.? It seemed a little too early for popcorn or candy, which was probably a mistake on my part because I spent the entire 90 minutes of the movies starving.
I don't know if my hunger put me in a bad mood or what, but I'm sorry to say I didn't really enjoy Cure For Love. It's an interesting idea for a documentary -- following four people active in the ex-gay movement (the Christian groups that try to teach gay people to become straight, or at least celibate), where one gay male and one gay female marry each other even though they admit they're not attracted to each other, and two other gays drop out of the movement -- and people had a lot of interesting things to say about being Christian and gay, but the documentary was marred by extremely overlong and not super insightful interviews and very dull visuals.
I kept thinking this would have been an excellent idea for a This American Life radio episode -- good idea, but no need for blurry visuals of the Pacific coast and/or so many shots of crucifixes, and Ira Glass is famous for both asking good questions and ruthlessly editing his material. Oh, and the other good thing about the movie is that my favorite Amazing Race racer from last season is interviewed, Mike White's dad Mel. I LOVE YOU, MEL!!!
My mood might have been further worsened by the short film that aired before Cure For Love, "Flight to Sinai." Though obviously made with a lot of love, the Afterschool Special air to the plot, the high school theater class level of the acting, and the movie's extremely mixed message (gay teens should go to ex-gay summer camps or your parents will never accept your sexual orientation) irritated me so much, I couldn't even enjoy that it was a musical that Colma the Musical's H.P. Mendoza assisted on.
Finally, I'll just note that I wrote this review after eating something -- so you can imagine how bad of a mood I was in when I left the theater! 11 a.m. is not a good time to show movies.
Source: http://sfappeal.com/culture/2009/06/frameline-film-fest-cure-for-love.php
by Rita Hao
June 22, 2009 12:00 PM
Who knew there'd be a sellout crowd at the Roxie for the Frameline film festival's movies about the ex-gay movement on Saturday morning at 11 a.m.? It seemed a little too early for popcorn or candy, which was probably a mistake on my part because I spent the entire 90 minutes of the movies starving.
I don't know if my hunger put me in a bad mood or what, but I'm sorry to say I didn't really enjoy Cure For Love. It's an interesting idea for a documentary -- following four people active in the ex-gay movement (the Christian groups that try to teach gay people to become straight, or at least celibate), where one gay male and one gay female marry each other even though they admit they're not attracted to each other, and two other gays drop out of the movement -- and people had a lot of interesting things to say about being Christian and gay, but the documentary was marred by extremely overlong and not super insightful interviews and very dull visuals.
I kept thinking this would have been an excellent idea for a This American Life radio episode -- good idea, but no need for blurry visuals of the Pacific coast and/or so many shots of crucifixes, and Ira Glass is famous for both asking good questions and ruthlessly editing his material. Oh, and the other good thing about the movie is that my favorite Amazing Race racer from last season is interviewed, Mike White's dad Mel. I LOVE YOU, MEL!!!
My mood might have been further worsened by the short film that aired before Cure For Love, "Flight to Sinai." Though obviously made with a lot of love, the Afterschool Special air to the plot, the high school theater class level of the acting, and the movie's extremely mixed message (gay teens should go to ex-gay summer camps or your parents will never accept your sexual orientation) irritated me so much, I couldn't even enjoy that it was a musical that Colma the Musical's H.P. Mendoza assisted on.
Finally, I'll just note that I wrote this review after eating something -- so you can imagine how bad of a mood I was in when I left the theater! 11 a.m. is not a good time to show movies.
Source: http://sfappeal.com/culture/2009/06/frameline-film-fest-cure-for-love.php
Religious study: Gays not "godless" "Christian bashers"
Religious study: Gays not "godless" "Christian bashers"
This breaking news in from The Barna Group -- a chronicler of religious life and habits, particularly of the Christian variety: Gay folks' attitudes about spirituality aren't much different from straight folks. These and other "surprising insights" were in Barna's spiritual profile of gays released Monday. In it was a bit of a political heeding for gay-bashers:
"People who portray gay adults as godless, hedonistic, Christian bashers are not working with the facts," wrote George Barna Monday. "A substantial majority of gays cite their faith as a central facet of their life, consider themselves to be Christian, and claim to have some type of meaningful personal commitment to Jesus Christ active in their life today."
"It is interesting to see that most homosexuals, who have some history within the Christian Church, have rejected orthodox biblical teachings and principles -- but, in many cases, to nearly the same degree that the heterosexual Christian population has rejected those same teachings and principles," Barna said. "Although there are clearly some substantial differences in the religious beliefs and practices of the straight and gay populations, there may be less of a spiritual gap between straights and gays than many Americans would assume."
Now there will be some quibbling with a couple of Barna's assumptions. Like how Barna pegs the LGBT population at about 3 percent of the adult population. No, he doesn't believe in the 1-in-10 stat, but then again, LGBT population scholar Gary Gates says it's more like 5 percent, depending how you count.
That aside, the Barnanians found that "out of the 20 faith-oriented attributes examined in the Barna study, there were just a few in which there were no significant differences between the heterosexual and homosexual populations."
Hmm. "No significant differences between the heterosexual and homosexual"(s)? Does Donald Wildmon know about this?
One big diff, according to the study: "While seven out of every ten heterosexuals (71 percent) have an orthodox, biblical perception of God, just 43 percent of homosexuals do. In fact, an equal percentage possesses a pantheistic view about deity -- i.e., that 'God' refers to any of a variety of perspectives, such as personally achieving a state of higher consciousness or maximized personal potential, or that there are multiple gods that exist, or even that everyone is god."
Another diff: "Heterosexuals were twice as likely as homosexuals to strongly agree that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches."
And in the timeliness is next to godliness (OK, and cleanliness) dept: On Monday a crew of organizations supporting same sex marriage are launching their Get Engaged Tour of California -- a pump-priming tour of the state in advance of an expected 2010 ballot measure campaign expected later this year. We told you about it a while back. Faith leaders will be prominently featured on this tour, as opposed to last year's anti-Proposition 8 campaign, when they were largely invisible.
"Our faith-based values require us to love our neighbor as ourselves," said Pastor Samuel Chu, of California Faith for Equality. "Gay and lesbian people are our neighbors and they should be able to enjoy the dignity, respect and commitment that come with marriage."
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=42129
This breaking news in from The Barna Group -- a chronicler of religious life and habits, particularly of the Christian variety: Gay folks' attitudes about spirituality aren't much different from straight folks. These and other "surprising insights" were in Barna's spiritual profile of gays released Monday. In it was a bit of a political heeding for gay-bashers:
"People who portray gay adults as godless, hedonistic, Christian bashers are not working with the facts," wrote George Barna Monday. "A substantial majority of gays cite their faith as a central facet of their life, consider themselves to be Christian, and claim to have some type of meaningful personal commitment to Jesus Christ active in their life today."
"It is interesting to see that most homosexuals, who have some history within the Christian Church, have rejected orthodox biblical teachings and principles -- but, in many cases, to nearly the same degree that the heterosexual Christian population has rejected those same teachings and principles," Barna said. "Although there are clearly some substantial differences in the religious beliefs and practices of the straight and gay populations, there may be less of a spiritual gap between straights and gays than many Americans would assume."
Now there will be some quibbling with a couple of Barna's assumptions. Like how Barna pegs the LGBT population at about 3 percent of the adult population. No, he doesn't believe in the 1-in-10 stat, but then again, LGBT population scholar Gary Gates says it's more like 5 percent, depending how you count.
That aside, the Barnanians found that "out of the 20 faith-oriented attributes examined in the Barna study, there were just a few in which there were no significant differences between the heterosexual and homosexual populations."
Hmm. "No significant differences between the heterosexual and homosexual"(s)? Does Donald Wildmon know about this?
One big diff, according to the study: "While seven out of every ten heterosexuals (71 percent) have an orthodox, biblical perception of God, just 43 percent of homosexuals do. In fact, an equal percentage possesses a pantheistic view about deity -- i.e., that 'God' refers to any of a variety of perspectives, such as personally achieving a state of higher consciousness or maximized personal potential, or that there are multiple gods that exist, or even that everyone is god."
Another diff: "Heterosexuals were twice as likely as homosexuals to strongly agree that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches."
And in the timeliness is next to godliness (OK, and cleanliness) dept: On Monday a crew of organizations supporting same sex marriage are launching their Get Engaged Tour of California -- a pump-priming tour of the state in advance of an expected 2010 ballot measure campaign expected later this year. We told you about it a while back. Faith leaders will be prominently featured on this tour, as opposed to last year's anti-Proposition 8 campaign, when they were largely invisible.
"Our faith-based values require us to love our neighbor as ourselves," said Pastor Samuel Chu, of California Faith for Equality. "Gay and lesbian people are our neighbors and they should be able to enjoy the dignity, respect and commitment that come with marriage."
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=42129
Friday, June 19, 2009
Christians, gays to synchronize their blogging
By Lloyd Mackey
FOUR DOZEN or more bloggers will be "synchronized" next Wednesday, June 24, in the interests of opening online discussions between Christians and their gay neighbours.
Spearheaded by New Direction Ministry (NDM), the "synchro-blog" will be known as 'Bridging the Gap: Christians and Gay Neighbours.'
NDM executive director Wendy Gritter said the organizers' prayer for the blog is that it "would model an opportunity for multiple conversations from multiple perspectives, with a commitment to hear one another with grace, humility and respect.
"We need other Christ-followers to share the heart of the gospel in the midst of the (Christian-gay) conflict," she added. "We need those beyond the walls of the church to share their thoughts on how the church can reach across the divide and build bridges."
The discussion is drawing support from a fair range of mainstream and emerging evangelical church leadership, including such as Bruxy Cavey of The Meeting House, Greg Paul of Sanctuary, Lorna Dueck of ListenUp and Mark Petersen of Bridgeway Foundation.
In a video supporting the effort, Petersen speaks of the need to get "beyond our polarities", and suggests it is time to advance past "the (non-productive) generation of culture wars."
Petersen's involvement in the blog grew out of Bridgeway's support for an interactive DVD developed by NDM, said Gritter. The foundation contributed seed funding of $35,000 for the project, entitled Bridging the Gap: Conversations on Befriending our Gay Neighbours. The total budget, in cash and kind, was over $100,000.
Some of the June 24 bloggers will be doing reviews of the DVD.
At press time, a total of 51 bloggers were registered. Gritter said she is hopeful that 100 or so might be available by June 24.
People unfamiliar with Christian-gay discussion terminology will note references to 'straight,' 'side a' and 'side b.' These refer to the points of view from which individuals view their own sexuality and lifestyle practices.
People find themselves at various spots along the sexuality continuum from straight to gay, as well as in terms of how they build lifestyle and spiritual decisions around their perspectives, said Gritter.
She allowed that NDM is taking a bit of flack from religious conservatives and liberals alike. The former suggest that the BTG project is going too far in acceptance of gay perspectives, while theological and social liberals maintain that it does not go far enough.
Gritter stoutly avoided the assumption that "Christian" and "gay" are mutually exclusive spheres. But she noted that, in developing this project, she has steered clear of inviting or featuring major gay Christian leaders, such as Brent Hawkes of the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto.
Part of that motivation is to keep the channels of communication open to ordinary people, and to avoid the polarity that comes from the advocating of one view or another.
On June 24, blogs that cross a line into abusive or propositional communication will be delinked, she suggested, maintaining that she fully expects most of the conversation will be constructive and friendly.
Gritter said she hopes the "clobber texts" -- the several biblical texts that gay rights activists often use to provide evidence that Christians and their Bible "clobber" gays -- will not be a corrosive part of the discussion.
Greg Paul of Sanctuary, an inner city Toronto church that has spun from the progressive wing of the Plymouth Brethren movement, said "trying to bring together two groups of people who really don't want to like each other isn't easy.
"Try to imagine building a bridge across a turbulent river, in the midst of a raging battle -- with both sides shooting at you . . . Such radical reconciliation efforts come only at a cost, but so does the gospel itself.
"New Direction, many years ago, was one of those Christian organizations that gay, lesbian and transgendered people loved to hate. In the intervening years, it has become one of the few true bridge builders between evangelical Christians an the gay community."
Gritter noted that the divisive rhetoric could heighten as Toronto's Gay Pride Week kicks off June 19.
"Our goal, conversely, will be to focus hearts and to open up relationally," she said. "We want to ensure that there is a safe place for these discussions."
June 18/2009
Source: http://www.canadianchristianity.com/nationalupdates/090618blogging.html
FOUR DOZEN or more bloggers will be "synchronized" next Wednesday, June 24, in the interests of opening online discussions between Christians and their gay neighbours.
Spearheaded by New Direction Ministry (NDM), the "synchro-blog" will be known as 'Bridging the Gap: Christians and Gay Neighbours.'
NDM executive director Wendy Gritter said the organizers' prayer for the blog is that it "would model an opportunity for multiple conversations from multiple perspectives, with a commitment to hear one another with grace, humility and respect.
"We need other Christ-followers to share the heart of the gospel in the midst of the (Christian-gay) conflict," she added. "We need those beyond the walls of the church to share their thoughts on how the church can reach across the divide and build bridges."
The discussion is drawing support from a fair range of mainstream and emerging evangelical church leadership, including such as Bruxy Cavey of The Meeting House, Greg Paul of Sanctuary, Lorna Dueck of ListenUp and Mark Petersen of Bridgeway Foundation.
In a video supporting the effort, Petersen speaks of the need to get "beyond our polarities", and suggests it is time to advance past "the (non-productive) generation of culture wars."
Petersen's involvement in the blog grew out of Bridgeway's support for an interactive DVD developed by NDM, said Gritter. The foundation contributed seed funding of $35,000 for the project, entitled Bridging the Gap: Conversations on Befriending our Gay Neighbours. The total budget, in cash and kind, was over $100,000.
Some of the June 24 bloggers will be doing reviews of the DVD.
At press time, a total of 51 bloggers were registered. Gritter said she is hopeful that 100 or so might be available by June 24.
People unfamiliar with Christian-gay discussion terminology will note references to 'straight,' 'side a' and 'side b.' These refer to the points of view from which individuals view their own sexuality and lifestyle practices.
People find themselves at various spots along the sexuality continuum from straight to gay, as well as in terms of how they build lifestyle and spiritual decisions around their perspectives, said Gritter.
She allowed that NDM is taking a bit of flack from religious conservatives and liberals alike. The former suggest that the BTG project is going too far in acceptance of gay perspectives, while theological and social liberals maintain that it does not go far enough.
Gritter stoutly avoided the assumption that "Christian" and "gay" are mutually exclusive spheres. But she noted that, in developing this project, she has steered clear of inviting or featuring major gay Christian leaders, such as Brent Hawkes of the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto.
Part of that motivation is to keep the channels of communication open to ordinary people, and to avoid the polarity that comes from the advocating of one view or another.
On June 24, blogs that cross a line into abusive or propositional communication will be delinked, she suggested, maintaining that she fully expects most of the conversation will be constructive and friendly.
Gritter said she hopes the "clobber texts" -- the several biblical texts that gay rights activists often use to provide evidence that Christians and their Bible "clobber" gays -- will not be a corrosive part of the discussion.
Greg Paul of Sanctuary, an inner city Toronto church that has spun from the progressive wing of the Plymouth Brethren movement, said "trying to bring together two groups of people who really don't want to like each other isn't easy.
"Try to imagine building a bridge across a turbulent river, in the midst of a raging battle -- with both sides shooting at you . . . Such radical reconciliation efforts come only at a cost, but so does the gospel itself.
"New Direction, many years ago, was one of those Christian organizations that gay, lesbian and transgendered people loved to hate. In the intervening years, it has become one of the few true bridge builders between evangelical Christians an the gay community."
Gritter noted that the divisive rhetoric could heighten as Toronto's Gay Pride Week kicks off June 19.
"Our goal, conversely, will be to focus hearts and to open up relationally," she said. "We want to ensure that there is a safe place for these discussions."
June 18/2009
Source: http://www.canadianchristianity.com/nationalupdates/090618blogging.html
Good News! God loves the GLBT community!
Evangelicals Concerned Western Region (ECWR) is pleased to announce their upcoming annual retreat, ConnECtion 2009, to be held July 15-19, 2009 in Palm Springs, California. The theme for this year's conference is Springs of Living Water.
What?: ECWR Annual Conference
When?: July 15-19, 2009
Where?: Holiday Inn, Palm Springs, California
ConnECtion is an annual conference that provides a safe, loving, nurturing space for GLBT Christians to fellowship with like-minded people to edify and encourage each other towards greater maturity in Christ. The conference includes general sessions with keynote speakers, topic-driven workshop sessions, and social time to interact with fellow GLBT Christians.
2009 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS
Reverend Stacy Latimer
Reverend Stacey Latimer is an HIV-positive military vet who speaks openly about his relationships with men. Latimer has lead the black church's growing fight against AIDS across America with over 15 years of experience serving communities in the field of HIV/ AIDS. His service in and to communities of faith has spanned nationally and across many denominational lines. As an Ordained Minister of the gospel and an Inspirational Motivational Speaker, Mr. Latimer travels extensively, heralding a message of hope in the midst of the horrific epidemic of HIV/AIDS. As a 20-year survivor of an HIV diagnosis, Mr. Latimer shares his wisdom and knowledge with the community through articles, speaking engagements, workshops, and conferences.Dr. Ralph Blair
Dr. Ralph Blair is the founder of Evangelicals Concerned, Incorporated and a psychotherapist in private practice in New York. Since 1980 Dr. Blair has sponsored ConnECtion, annual conferences in both the east and the west which have been life changing experiences for hundreds of gay men, women, and friends who are responding with trust to God's love and who seek to live thankfully and faithfully under God's grace and peace.Rev. Elise Elrod
Rev. Elise Elrod began her journey from presenting as male to presenting as herself in 1999. She is an ordained minister, a noted speaker, an award winning writer and published photographer. She lives in Nashville , TN with her spouse of thirty-nine years. They have three grown children and three grandchildren. She served two Southern Baptist churches, holds a Masters of Divinity degree and and is currently pastor of Christ's Community Church, Chicopee, MA. She has obtained Privilege of Call in the United Church of Christ. Because of discrimination, Elrod went from once making half a million a year as an engineer to 12 dollars an hour as a secretary. She speaks publically in churches, medical schools and universities concerning issues of diversity and gender. A Baptist pastor and former engineer, Elrod's topics cover the true definition of Gender Identity Disorder (GID) and the issues faced by transition, "the nature of bias," and answers questions about her personal life.About Evangelicals Concerned
Evangelicals Concerned (EC) is a nationwide ministry which encourages and affirms lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered Christians in their faith. We organize small groups, bible studies, social activities and other events in many North American cities, and we organize national and regional conferences every year.
ECWR is a non-denominational evangelical resource responds to the needs of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered evangelical Christians primarily through nurturing fellowship. It is a ministry providing a safe place for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered evangelical Christians to deal with issues of reconciliation, integration, and maturation of spirituality and sexuality.
We are open and affirming to all who embrace the Christian faith regardless of sexual orientation, age, ethnicity, or church membership. Through conferences, retreats, local groups, resource materials, education, leadership training, and personal support, EC serves as a role model to all evangelicals (gay or straight), to foster an integrated and healthy GLBT Christian life.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Study shows Australians support same-sex marriages
AAP
June 16, 2009 01:05pm
A NEW survey has shown 60 per cent of Australians support gay marriage.
The poll, conducted for the lobby group Australian Marriage Equality, found strong support for same-sex marriage, including among Coalition voters.
Of the 1100 respondents, 60 per cent were in favour of same-sex marriage.
And 58 per cent believed Australia should also recognise the marriages of immigrating same-sex couples who'd tied the knot overseas.
Some 75 per cent of Greens voters backed gay marriage compared with 63 per cent of Labor supporters and 49 per cent of Coalition voters.
Women were more likely to support gay marriage, with 65 per cent of them in favour of it compared with 51 per cent of men.
Support for gay marriage was strongest among Australians aged 16 to 24, with 74 per cent in favour compared with 45 per cent for those aged over 50.
Australian Greens leader Bob Brown, who is openly gay, used the survey results to urge the Rudd Government to offer same-sex couples more than civil unions.
Related Coverage
California upholds ban on gay marriage
The Australian, 27 May 2009
California upholds gay marriage ban
NEWS.com.au, 27 May 2009
California to rule on gay marriage ban
NEWS.com.au, 23 May 2009
US state allows same-sex marriage
NEWS.com.au, 4 Apr 2009
America's progressive paradox
The Australian, 9 Nov 2008 "We're discriminated against under the marriage laws,'' he said, adding that a Centrelink advertisement prompting equal benefits for same-sex couples was misleading.
"The Australian people are way ahead of the Rudd Government and the Turnbull Opposition.''
Asked if the Government needed the political support of Christian groups, Senator Brown said the Christian community had moved on.
"It would be supported, very likely, by a majority of the Christian community,'' he said.
Australian Marriage Equality national convenor Peter Furness said gay marriage would be recognised overseas, unlike civil unions.
"If someone has a marriage certificate, it puts their legal status beyond question,'' Mr Furness said, adding matrimony should be about love and commitment, not gender.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25644404-29277,00.html
June 16, 2009 01:05pm
A NEW survey has shown 60 per cent of Australians support gay marriage.
The poll, conducted for the lobby group Australian Marriage Equality, found strong support for same-sex marriage, including among Coalition voters.
Of the 1100 respondents, 60 per cent were in favour of same-sex marriage.
And 58 per cent believed Australia should also recognise the marriages of immigrating same-sex couples who'd tied the knot overseas.
Some 75 per cent of Greens voters backed gay marriage compared with 63 per cent of Labor supporters and 49 per cent of Coalition voters.
Women were more likely to support gay marriage, with 65 per cent of them in favour of it compared with 51 per cent of men.
Support for gay marriage was strongest among Australians aged 16 to 24, with 74 per cent in favour compared with 45 per cent for those aged over 50.
Australian Greens leader Bob Brown, who is openly gay, used the survey results to urge the Rudd Government to offer same-sex couples more than civil unions.
Related Coverage
California upholds ban on gay marriage
The Australian, 27 May 2009
California upholds gay marriage ban
NEWS.com.au, 27 May 2009
California to rule on gay marriage ban
NEWS.com.au, 23 May 2009
US state allows same-sex marriage
NEWS.com.au, 4 Apr 2009
America's progressive paradox
The Australian, 9 Nov 2008 "We're discriminated against under the marriage laws,'' he said, adding that a Centrelink advertisement prompting equal benefits for same-sex couples was misleading.
"The Australian people are way ahead of the Rudd Government and the Turnbull Opposition.''
Asked if the Government needed the political support of Christian groups, Senator Brown said the Christian community had moved on.
"It would be supported, very likely, by a majority of the Christian community,'' he said.
Australian Marriage Equality national convenor Peter Furness said gay marriage would be recognised overseas, unlike civil unions.
"If someone has a marriage certificate, it puts their legal status beyond question,'' Mr Furness said, adding matrimony should be about love and commitment, not gender.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25644404-29277,00.html
Monday, June 15, 2009
A Focus on Ties That Legally Bind
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401992.html
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Conference builds bridges for gay evangelicals
Evangelical Network holds annual event in Gastonia
by Matt Comer | June 13th, 2009
Jeff Smith, of Louisville, Ky., worships with other Evangelical Network conference-goers.
When most people hear the word “evangelical,” they immediately think of people like the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson of “The 700 Club” or Focus on the Family’s James Dobson. Far-right fundamentalists, it seems, don’t have a monopoly on the word.
Over the last weekend in May, LGBT Christians and evangelicals from around the nation convened in Gastonia, N.C., for a weekend of fellowship, worship, community building and guidance. The Evangelical Network’s annual conference was held here on the east coast for the first time in the group’s 10-year run.
“We had never done a conference on the east coast,” says Ed Ness, The Evangelical Network’s media director. “We’d predominately been in the midwest and southwest.”
Ness says that the cost of travel is a challenge to many of his group’s members. Holding conferences in different parts of the country each year helps those who can’t always travel far. Over 100 people attended the conference. Many of the attendees were from the Carolinas and the South, including Georgia and Kentucky. Some came from as far away as California and Canada.
David Thomas, pastor of Abundant Grace Church near Hickory, was one of several local leaders who helped to organize the conference and assist with logistics. He told Q-Notes that he was excited to bring the conference to the state and help heal some of the rifts between LGBT people and their faith.
“Evangelicals have given the word ‘evangelical’ a bad rap,” he said. “The word comes from a Greek word meaning ‘good news.’ It is the good news of Jesus Christ. We believe the gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ, that he came to bring love, peace, deliverance and salvation to liberate peoples’ lives.”
Thomas was a speaker during one of the conference’s several worship experiences. He said he wanted to give people the message that they shouldn’t ever let anyone look down on them for any reason.
“If you are a person who believes in God, loves God, don’t let people look down on you,” he said. “Live a life that exemplifies what Christ’s life was about: love and caring for other people.”
Thomas, who has been together with his partner, a pastor at a gay-welcoming church in Winston-Salem, for 13 years, founded Abundant Grace Church in 2003. Prior to the church’s founding he had helped to lead a small Bible study for LGBT people.
“Our church is created to be a place for all people,” he said, “but we notice in the gay community they were not finding what they were looking for.” He said many LGBT-affirming churches didn’t have enough of an evangelical feel for many folks who grew up in Baptist or Pentecostal traditions.
Candace Chellew-Hodge, associate pastor at Columbia’s Garden of Grace United Church of Christ, was a featured speaker and workshop discussion leader at the conference. Her workshop, along with several essays written over several years, is the basis of her book, “Bulletproof Faith,” which came out in October 2008.
“The workshop gives folks tools and ways to respond to attacks from other people who say you can’t be LGBTQ and Christian,” she said.
Chellew-Hodge has been fighting to heal LGBT Christians’ faiths for years. In the days when the internet was still some newfangled toy most folks had never used, she founded Whosoever, the world’s first online magazine for LGBT Christians.
Publishing new material each and every month, Whosoever covers all sorts of issues and provides resources for those seeking to reconcile their faith and sexuality.
“The most popular topic, by far, is homosexuality and religion,” Chellew-Hodge said. “Whosoever has been an amazing resource for people who are looking for ways to talk to family members and friends about being gay and Christian and reconciling their faith and sexual orientation. That can be difficult.”
Chellew-Hodge said she’s had “more people than I can count” tell her how much of a change in their lives the online magazine’s resources made for them. She thinks that the Bible is still the LGBT community’s biggest stumbling block. “We want to know that we are okay, that we are not condemned.” Chellew-Hodge says the stories she hears of others coming to terms with faith and identity are enough to break her heart.
“It is the reason why I wrote the book, trying to give people a road map on how I got to where I am,” she said. “I’m where I don’t have to fight with anyone anymore, or argue with anyone. I’ve stopped taking it personally, because I know that I am okay with my god.”
Ness said the conference was a success. Next year, they’ll head off to Irvine, Calif., right in the middle of Orange County — heart of conservative California.
by Matt Comer | June 13th, 2009
Jeff Smith, of Louisville, Ky., worships with other Evangelical Network conference-goers.
When most people hear the word “evangelical,” they immediately think of people like the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson of “The 700 Club” or Focus on the Family’s James Dobson. Far-right fundamentalists, it seems, don’t have a monopoly on the word.
Over the last weekend in May, LGBT Christians and evangelicals from around the nation convened in Gastonia, N.C., for a weekend of fellowship, worship, community building and guidance. The Evangelical Network’s annual conference was held here on the east coast for the first time in the group’s 10-year run.
“We had never done a conference on the east coast,” says Ed Ness, The Evangelical Network’s media director. “We’d predominately been in the midwest and southwest.”
Ness says that the cost of travel is a challenge to many of his group’s members. Holding conferences in different parts of the country each year helps those who can’t always travel far. Over 100 people attended the conference. Many of the attendees were from the Carolinas and the South, including Georgia and Kentucky. Some came from as far away as California and Canada.
David Thomas, pastor of Abundant Grace Church near Hickory, was one of several local leaders who helped to organize the conference and assist with logistics. He told Q-Notes that he was excited to bring the conference to the state and help heal some of the rifts between LGBT people and their faith.
“Evangelicals have given the word ‘evangelical’ a bad rap,” he said. “The word comes from a Greek word meaning ‘good news.’ It is the good news of Jesus Christ. We believe the gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ, that he came to bring love, peace, deliverance and salvation to liberate peoples’ lives.”
Thomas was a speaker during one of the conference’s several worship experiences. He said he wanted to give people the message that they shouldn’t ever let anyone look down on them for any reason.
“If you are a person who believes in God, loves God, don’t let people look down on you,” he said. “Live a life that exemplifies what Christ’s life was about: love and caring for other people.”
Thomas, who has been together with his partner, a pastor at a gay-welcoming church in Winston-Salem, for 13 years, founded Abundant Grace Church in 2003. Prior to the church’s founding he had helped to lead a small Bible study for LGBT people.
“Our church is created to be a place for all people,” he said, “but we notice in the gay community they were not finding what they were looking for.” He said many LGBT-affirming churches didn’t have enough of an evangelical feel for many folks who grew up in Baptist or Pentecostal traditions.
Candace Chellew-Hodge, associate pastor at Columbia’s Garden of Grace United Church of Christ, was a featured speaker and workshop discussion leader at the conference. Her workshop, along with several essays written over several years, is the basis of her book, “Bulletproof Faith,” which came out in October 2008.
“The workshop gives folks tools and ways to respond to attacks from other people who say you can’t be LGBTQ and Christian,” she said.
Chellew-Hodge has been fighting to heal LGBT Christians’ faiths for years. In the days when the internet was still some newfangled toy most folks had never used, she founded Whosoever, the world’s first online magazine for LGBT Christians.
Publishing new material each and every month, Whosoever covers all sorts of issues and provides resources for those seeking to reconcile their faith and sexuality.
“The most popular topic, by far, is homosexuality and religion,” Chellew-Hodge said. “Whosoever has been an amazing resource for people who are looking for ways to talk to family members and friends about being gay and Christian and reconciling their faith and sexual orientation. That can be difficult.”
Chellew-Hodge said she’s had “more people than I can count” tell her how much of a change in their lives the online magazine’s resources made for them. She thinks that the Bible is still the LGBT community’s biggest stumbling block. “We want to know that we are okay, that we are not condemned.” Chellew-Hodge says the stories she hears of others coming to terms with faith and identity are enough to break her heart.
“It is the reason why I wrote the book, trying to give people a road map on how I got to where I am,” she said. “I’m where I don’t have to fight with anyone anymore, or argue with anyone. I’ve stopped taking it personally, because I know that I am okay with my god.”
Ness said the conference was a success. Next year, they’ll head off to Irvine, Calif., right in the middle of Orange County — heart of conservative California.
Types of Christianity and Gay Politics
by Joncleir
Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 08:41:13 PM PDT
It is useful to understand that, in the US, the decentralization of Christian power in the post-Reformation era produced a hundred or more small centers of organization - the denominations; each of which reflect the era in which they crystallized; the cultural heritage of the ethnic group to which the originators of the denomination belonged, and the peculiarities of the personalities who formed the ideas and traditions that constitute the crystalline structure in consciousness that is copied by its adherents from generation to generation.
It is as if, when the originating organism - the Roman Catholic Church, broke into pieces, each broken piece grew anew, but with only fragments of the code of the parent organism, and incorporating new instructions from elements that it synthesized from competing and proximal religious systems; and from mutations that were introduced by individuals and smaller collections as they replicated; so that, decade by decade, an entirely diverse set of child organisms, like so many breeds of dogs, appeared - all of them still called Christian.
Joncleir's diary :: ::
Everyone knows how broken up Christianity is - but in the common vernacular, because that common vernacular is secular in character, and the conflict between religious factions in the US has been minimized and detoxified by the overriding principle of the separation of church and state, it is not typical to ever hear in the common media anything but generalities and an assumed Christian identity - the American identity which is generalized as 'Christian' subsumes denominational identity in the media as it does in public schools or the military where identity rooted in Christian factionalism has historically been, in essence, rendered invisible. There are few exceptions that are most-often labeled as cults, very few of which are explicitly not Christian; and then there are growing populations of non-Christian religions - but these are not the main subject of this post.
The fight over gay marriage exposes the factionalism that still characterizes Christian denominations, even splitting some yet again as members resist giving up the copy that they personally have preserved - as older folks have resisted giving up 19th century hymns. There are numerous Baptist groups, many Lutheran groups, a few variations of the Church of Christ (my favorite being the Church of Christ Non-Instrumental: they do not use musical instruments...)
In rural areas, Christianity is largely a copy of the culture as it was in the colonial era or the era of mass in-migration from 19th century Europe. In the suburbs, Christianity has synthesized mass culture syncretically, so that the guitar and the hippie culture appear on the stage of the church-as-theatre along with a traditionally dressed minister; and more, the suit and tie have disappeared along with Thee and Thy. In the major cities, the historic edifices of the Protestant High Churches stand all around, and only recently have been re-incorporated as lively centers of activity - their blue-haired decades almost at an end.
In the latter half of the twentieth century, we could classify Christianity in the US has having five major groupings: Ecumenists - secularized Christians in urban areas who wished to preserve the experience of churchgoing and its formal buildings, music, and traditions; Fundamentalists - factions of Christians whose core identity hardened around the middle of the 19th century when biblical literalism sought to counter science, as religion fought with science for legitimacy. Ironically, biblical literalists seized on the Bible as empirical evidence of God's existence and instruction manual; Pentecostals - Christians who have incorporated ecstatic personal experience, experience of the Holy Spirit, and formalized it alongside with a variation of fundamentalism; Mega-church Christians - Christians whose identity is a blend of all-of-the-above - suburban Christianity, and lastly Roman Catholics - who are a mix of Ecumenists and Fundamentalism - but a fundamentalism based on traditions and not on literal interpretations of the Bible.
Ecumenists are gay welcoming. In the urban churches that are the base of the ecumenist movement and in their partner churches even in places like Arkansas, where the message of ecumenism, however isolated in its minority status, is essentially urban in character, Ecumenists have created a comfortable synthesis of science and religion, preserved their fine buildings, created a community of friends, and are the inheritors of the 18th and 19th century Christian enlightenment philosophies of liberalism and positivism.
Fundamentalists are gay fearing if not always gay hating. The central idea of fundamentalism is heaven versus hell, God versus the Devil; and in this intensely dualistic and confused Christianity, projection is the main psychological mechanism. To fundamentalists anything other than the copy they themselves made of the religion they inherited is likely to be evil. Fundamentalists are the culture war. Because their knowledge of God is equal to the force of their ability to interpret His Word - they are easily led by those that lay claim to the best interpretation, and because Fundamentalism cannot stand up to even a basic education - they are constantly in conflict with the culture around them, and are only comfortable in communities that are not intellectually or culturally diverse.
Pentecostals are gay-fearing and anti-gay on account of their also being Fundamentalists of a kind, and because the way in which they have formalized religious ecstasy (glossolalia - speaking in tongues, their music and their ideology is too narrowly defined and too much a copy of the 19th century encounter between Christianity and African ecstatic religions to incorporate gay identity, which itself is a political construction formed out of modern urban conditions and is alien to the pre-WWII culture that Pentecostalism preserves.
Mega-church Christianity is up for grabs for gays. A mix of watered down Fundamentalism and Pentecostalism, mega-church Christianity reflects the intrusion and incorporation of modern media into religious practice - from Kathryn Kuhlman and Oral Roberts to Billy Graham and the Jesus Movement, celebrity pastors lead large and essentially temporary congregations through increasingly sophisticated adaptations of the mass secular culture's music. Mega-church Christianity is a form of consumer culture - the congregation as audience and the church as theater. At the core of mega-church Christianity there remains its major problem - whether the Bible is empirical evidence of God - and thus God's rulebook - or whether God must be experienced existentially - Jesus as personal savior. So far, Mega-churches continue to lean to the direction of God and/or Jesus as Judge and Prosecutor (God retaining the role as sentencer and Jesus as Intercessor , Pastor as Lawyer, and the Bible as law. but they are moving steadily in the direction of the church as a social club whose primary goal is to fill the gap in people's lives for a sense of community, however ad hoc. More than 40% of attendees to California's mega-churches voted to keep gay marriage legal. They almost all have gay friends or family.
For gay identity - the fight for equality depends on insinuating copies of gay identity into these major Christian categories, or defeating the principles around which they are organized, as Luther and the Reformation leaders defeated the bishops who dominated the longest lasting copy - the Roman Catholic church. This is why it makes sense to single out Mormons, who claim to be Christians, but whose claim is largely rejected by the remainder of Christian types. They are already weakened by the perception of Fundamentalists and Pentecostals and Roman Catholics that Mormonism is a heretical cult.
Fundamentalists inherently cannot accept insinuation of gay identity into their community - they are an enemy of gay identity and can only be weakened by reduction of their number; and reduction of their number can only be accomplished one-on-one by persistent rational argument on their turf - the turf of the Bible; and in the general public, by isolating them through ridicule and ostracizing - because their ideas are without merit or sense and reasonable people should reject their ideas with force and vigor.
Pentecostals are perhaps today the most virulently anti-gay - but because their religious views are based on religious ecstasy and personal experience - they can be picked off one by one or by competing on their turf - which is powerful religious experiences, but as an institution they must be defeated, as with fundamentalists. If they see that someone is having a more powerful and exciting religious experience than their own - they often drop their fundamentalism and move on - it is a relatively fluid population. For blacks, in some measure, hip-hop is such a competing culture: while it is not religious in character, it is identity-creating and offers an alternative to gospel, as rock'n'roll offers an alternative to the moribund culture of religious hymnody and the neo-classicism that characterizes the mainstream religions. Since Pentecostal ideas and practices are anachronistic in the context of American secular culture - their influence among the middle and upper classes will continue to wane; but in the Third World and among the black communities of the US it is a different story - there, Pentecostals and their kissing cousins, black churches with gospel music or full gospel churches - have as their core identity a powerfully preserved and defended religious identity - an identity that formed in the context of slavery and thus is hardened as a diamond against outside influence. Pentecostalism in Latin America has shown remarkable growth in every urban area. American and South American black Pentecostalism are both a synthesis of African ecstatic and spiritist practice (the Holy Ghost is very African!), poor white fundamentalist, and traditional Pentecostal elements. Black religion is intensely internalized and resistant to change, and it is anti-gay: just as anti-gay as the black community generally - because at its core, for African-Americans, be they South or North American, gay identity is an alien and deviant outgrowth of white culture and a threat to black masculinity. Black religion and black culture will not change as long as black men are on the down low - and can only be changed by insinuating masculine gay personalities into the pantheon of personalities that African-American peoples choose to replicate in their own person: it cannot be defeated by white intellectuals, rational arguments, or the success of white persons.
Because Americans consider themselves to be members of a Christian nation, and because Christianity historically has been homophobic in the extreme, I am generally Anti-Christian. Having worked in Washington DC for the last year +, I have come to understand that the Ecumenists are genuinely accepting and warmly embrace homosexual persons and gay identity. The large urban churches in DC fly rainbow flags, proudly include the code words 'welcoming' and 'open and affirming' to announce their acceptance and even proselytizing of gay men and women. Even the mainstream Riverside Baptist church actively solicits gay membership - something I shared with my father, who spent 27 years as a fundamentalist Baptist preacher, but is now alienated from that tradition and essentially is not tied to any denomination.
The evolution of Christianity in this country points to a time in the next generation (well, for this generation, depending on how old you are...) when fundamentalists and Pentecostals will form a tiny minority of the overall religious community, and while African-Americans are likely to lag, since most African-American congregations are one form or another of fundamentalist/pentecostal - it is possible that leadership in the form of breakthrough individuals will create new models that people will use to clone personal identity as they form or re-form their own personality. Ecumenists are already welcoming, and mega-church Christians are so much a copy of secular culture that the time is very near that the issue of homosexual persons and gay identity will be a thing of the past, like divorce, female independence, and other issues before it.
This generational shift is the gay community's chance to accelerate that process by insuating its presence in the ranks of those Christian groups that accept them, and by openly working to defeat those that do not by attacking the weak foundation upon which their ideology and practice rests.
Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 08:41:13 PM PDT
It is useful to understand that, in the US, the decentralization of Christian power in the post-Reformation era produced a hundred or more small centers of organization - the denominations; each of which reflect the era in which they crystallized; the cultural heritage of the ethnic group to which the originators of the denomination belonged, and the peculiarities of the personalities who formed the ideas and traditions that constitute the crystalline structure in consciousness that is copied by its adherents from generation to generation.
It is as if, when the originating organism - the Roman Catholic Church, broke into pieces, each broken piece grew anew, but with only fragments of the code of the parent organism, and incorporating new instructions from elements that it synthesized from competing and proximal religious systems; and from mutations that were introduced by individuals and smaller collections as they replicated; so that, decade by decade, an entirely diverse set of child organisms, like so many breeds of dogs, appeared - all of them still called Christian.
Joncleir's diary :: ::
Everyone knows how broken up Christianity is - but in the common vernacular, because that common vernacular is secular in character, and the conflict between religious factions in the US has been minimized and detoxified by the overriding principle of the separation of church and state, it is not typical to ever hear in the common media anything but generalities and an assumed Christian identity - the American identity which is generalized as 'Christian' subsumes denominational identity in the media as it does in public schools or the military where identity rooted in Christian factionalism has historically been, in essence, rendered invisible. There are few exceptions that are most-often labeled as cults, very few of which are explicitly not Christian; and then there are growing populations of non-Christian religions - but these are not the main subject of this post.
The fight over gay marriage exposes the factionalism that still characterizes Christian denominations, even splitting some yet again as members resist giving up the copy that they personally have preserved - as older folks have resisted giving up 19th century hymns. There are numerous Baptist groups, many Lutheran groups, a few variations of the Church of Christ (my favorite being the Church of Christ Non-Instrumental: they do not use musical instruments...)
In rural areas, Christianity is largely a copy of the culture as it was in the colonial era or the era of mass in-migration from 19th century Europe. In the suburbs, Christianity has synthesized mass culture syncretically, so that the guitar and the hippie culture appear on the stage of the church-as-theatre along with a traditionally dressed minister; and more, the suit and tie have disappeared along with Thee and Thy. In the major cities, the historic edifices of the Protestant High Churches stand all around, and only recently have been re-incorporated as lively centers of activity - their blue-haired decades almost at an end.
In the latter half of the twentieth century, we could classify Christianity in the US has having five major groupings: Ecumenists - secularized Christians in urban areas who wished to preserve the experience of churchgoing and its formal buildings, music, and traditions; Fundamentalists - factions of Christians whose core identity hardened around the middle of the 19th century when biblical literalism sought to counter science, as religion fought with science for legitimacy. Ironically, biblical literalists seized on the Bible as empirical evidence of God's existence and instruction manual; Pentecostals - Christians who have incorporated ecstatic personal experience, experience of the Holy Spirit, and formalized it alongside with a variation of fundamentalism; Mega-church Christians - Christians whose identity is a blend of all-of-the-above - suburban Christianity, and lastly Roman Catholics - who are a mix of Ecumenists and Fundamentalism - but a fundamentalism based on traditions and not on literal interpretations of the Bible.
Ecumenists are gay welcoming. In the urban churches that are the base of the ecumenist movement and in their partner churches even in places like Arkansas, where the message of ecumenism, however isolated in its minority status, is essentially urban in character, Ecumenists have created a comfortable synthesis of science and religion, preserved their fine buildings, created a community of friends, and are the inheritors of the 18th and 19th century Christian enlightenment philosophies of liberalism and positivism.
Fundamentalists are gay fearing if not always gay hating. The central idea of fundamentalism is heaven versus hell, God versus the Devil; and in this intensely dualistic and confused Christianity, projection is the main psychological mechanism. To fundamentalists anything other than the copy they themselves made of the religion they inherited is likely to be evil. Fundamentalists are the culture war. Because their knowledge of God is equal to the force of their ability to interpret His Word - they are easily led by those that lay claim to the best interpretation, and because Fundamentalism cannot stand up to even a basic education - they are constantly in conflict with the culture around them, and are only comfortable in communities that are not intellectually or culturally diverse.
Pentecostals are gay-fearing and anti-gay on account of their also being Fundamentalists of a kind, and because the way in which they have formalized religious ecstasy (glossolalia - speaking in tongues, their music and their ideology is too narrowly defined and too much a copy of the 19th century encounter between Christianity and African ecstatic religions to incorporate gay identity, which itself is a political construction formed out of modern urban conditions and is alien to the pre-WWII culture that Pentecostalism preserves.
Mega-church Christianity is up for grabs for gays. A mix of watered down Fundamentalism and Pentecostalism, mega-church Christianity reflects the intrusion and incorporation of modern media into religious practice - from Kathryn Kuhlman and Oral Roberts to Billy Graham and the Jesus Movement, celebrity pastors lead large and essentially temporary congregations through increasingly sophisticated adaptations of the mass secular culture's music. Mega-church Christianity is a form of consumer culture - the congregation as audience and the church as theater. At the core of mega-church Christianity there remains its major problem - whether the Bible is empirical evidence of God - and thus God's rulebook - or whether God must be experienced existentially - Jesus as personal savior. So far, Mega-churches continue to lean to the direction of God and/or Jesus as Judge and Prosecutor (God retaining the role as sentencer and Jesus as Intercessor , Pastor as Lawyer, and the Bible as law. but they are moving steadily in the direction of the church as a social club whose primary goal is to fill the gap in people's lives for a sense of community, however ad hoc. More than 40% of attendees to California's mega-churches voted to keep gay marriage legal. They almost all have gay friends or family.
For gay identity - the fight for equality depends on insinuating copies of gay identity into these major Christian categories, or defeating the principles around which they are organized, as Luther and the Reformation leaders defeated the bishops who dominated the longest lasting copy - the Roman Catholic church. This is why it makes sense to single out Mormons, who claim to be Christians, but whose claim is largely rejected by the remainder of Christian types. They are already weakened by the perception of Fundamentalists and Pentecostals and Roman Catholics that Mormonism is a heretical cult.
Fundamentalists inherently cannot accept insinuation of gay identity into their community - they are an enemy of gay identity and can only be weakened by reduction of their number; and reduction of their number can only be accomplished one-on-one by persistent rational argument on their turf - the turf of the Bible; and in the general public, by isolating them through ridicule and ostracizing - because their ideas are without merit or sense and reasonable people should reject their ideas with force and vigor.
Pentecostals are perhaps today the most virulently anti-gay - but because their religious views are based on religious ecstasy and personal experience - they can be picked off one by one or by competing on their turf - which is powerful religious experiences, but as an institution they must be defeated, as with fundamentalists. If they see that someone is having a more powerful and exciting religious experience than their own - they often drop their fundamentalism and move on - it is a relatively fluid population. For blacks, in some measure, hip-hop is such a competing culture: while it is not religious in character, it is identity-creating and offers an alternative to gospel, as rock'n'roll offers an alternative to the moribund culture of religious hymnody and the neo-classicism that characterizes the mainstream religions. Since Pentecostal ideas and practices are anachronistic in the context of American secular culture - their influence among the middle and upper classes will continue to wane; but in the Third World and among the black communities of the US it is a different story - there, Pentecostals and their kissing cousins, black churches with gospel music or full gospel churches - have as their core identity a powerfully preserved and defended religious identity - an identity that formed in the context of slavery and thus is hardened as a diamond against outside influence. Pentecostalism in Latin America has shown remarkable growth in every urban area. American and South American black Pentecostalism are both a synthesis of African ecstatic and spiritist practice (the Holy Ghost is very African!), poor white fundamentalist, and traditional Pentecostal elements. Black religion is intensely internalized and resistant to change, and it is anti-gay: just as anti-gay as the black community generally - because at its core, for African-Americans, be they South or North American, gay identity is an alien and deviant outgrowth of white culture and a threat to black masculinity. Black religion and black culture will not change as long as black men are on the down low - and can only be changed by insinuating masculine gay personalities into the pantheon of personalities that African-American peoples choose to replicate in their own person: it cannot be defeated by white intellectuals, rational arguments, or the success of white persons.
Because Americans consider themselves to be members of a Christian nation, and because Christianity historically has been homophobic in the extreme, I am generally Anti-Christian. Having worked in Washington DC for the last year +, I have come to understand that the Ecumenists are genuinely accepting and warmly embrace homosexual persons and gay identity. The large urban churches in DC fly rainbow flags, proudly include the code words 'welcoming' and 'open and affirming' to announce their acceptance and even proselytizing of gay men and women. Even the mainstream Riverside Baptist church actively solicits gay membership - something I shared with my father, who spent 27 years as a fundamentalist Baptist preacher, but is now alienated from that tradition and essentially is not tied to any denomination.
The evolution of Christianity in this country points to a time in the next generation (well, for this generation, depending on how old you are...) when fundamentalists and Pentecostals will form a tiny minority of the overall religious community, and while African-Americans are likely to lag, since most African-American congregations are one form or another of fundamentalist/pentecostal - it is possible that leadership in the form of breakthrough individuals will create new models that people will use to clone personal identity as they form or re-form their own personality. Ecumenists are already welcoming, and mega-church Christians are so much a copy of secular culture that the time is very near that the issue of homosexual persons and gay identity will be a thing of the past, like divorce, female independence, and other issues before it.
This generational shift is the gay community's chance to accelerate that process by insuating its presence in the ranks of those Christian groups that accept them, and by openly working to defeat those that do not by attacking the weak foundation upon which their ideology and practice rests.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Anything But Straight: What’s Their Point?
By Wayne Besen
Wednesday, 10 June 2009 20:13
I'm on my way to Grand Rapids, Michigan to give a presentation at Grand Valley State University on the harm caused by the "ex-gay" industry.
My speech, followed by a panel discussion, is in response to Focus on the Family's traveling road show, Love Won Out, which will be in town on Saturday. Having countered several of these conferences, I must confess, I still don't understand what point they are trying to make.
If Focus on the Family's goal is to convert gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people into evangelical Christians, they are doing a lousy job. It seems convincing gay people to end their relationships is a far higher priority to this ministry than having gay people develop personal relationships with Jesus Christ.
For every guilt-ridden homosexual who temporarily falls under their spell, they lose hundreds, if not thousands, of gay people who view their conversion program as intolerant. If your ministry causes many gay people to write off not just Christianity, but all religion, by what measurement can you consider your evangelizing a success?
At Love Won Out, speakers go to great lengths to profess their deep concern over the mental and physical well being of homosexuals. It turns out, however, that the anti-gay sentiment expressed at these conferences may be hazardous to the health of GLBT people.
A new Emory University study concludes that the bans on same-sex marriage pushed by Focus on the Family can be tied to a rise in the rate o f HIV infection. The scientists found that a constitutional ban on marriage equality raised the rate by four cases per 100,000 people.
"We found the effects of tolerance for gays on HIV to be statistically significant and robust, they hold up under a range of empirical models," says Hugo Mialon, an assistant professor of economics. "Intolerance is deadly," Mialon said. "Bans on gay marriage codify intolerance, causing more gay people to shift to underground sexual behaviors that carry more risk."
Earlier this year, a study by San Francisco State's Caitlin Ryan concluded that "teens who experienced negative feedback (when they came out) were more than eight times as likely to have attempted suicide, nearly six times as vulnerable to severe depression and more than three times at risk of drug use."
So, if Love Won Out is truly concerned about the health of gay people, particularly teenagers, it will transform into a gay affirming ministry. To continue down their destructive path of judgmental condemnation is senseless and significantly harmful to the very GLBT people that Focus purports to want to help.
Of course, Focus on the Family will insist that they love gay people and just want to help those who are unhappy. But, isn't it a conflict of interest when you lobby to pass anti-gay laws that make gay people miserable and then offer yourself up as the panacea to the pain? Is it not hypocritical to sponsor a conference supposedly about love, where the main speaker is Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International?
Chambers hosts a Christian television show, Pure Passion, which pollutes the airwaves by repeatedly calling gay people "sexually broken" and "perverse." Exodus also sells "Pursuing Sexual Wholeness" a book authored by Andy Comiskey that says, "Satan delights in homosexual perversion." Such pronouncements are often accompanied by exorcisms given by churches affiliated with ex-gay ministries. Obviously, such extreme actions are anathema to creating a welcoming church environment for GLBT people.
Focus on the Family also claims its conferences are for parents, friends, family members or ministry leaders who want to "lovingly reach out with uncompromised faith."
Genuine love, of course, requires making the very compromises and sacrifices that Love Won Out is telling people are unnecessary. Rejecting a friend or family member's innate sexual orientation as sinful and defective, rarely leads to a healthy relationship based on trust and mutual respect.
Finally, the investigative reporter Thomas Maier just released a groundbreaking book, "Masters of Sex." In it, he reveals that the famed sex research team, Masters and Johnson, had fabricated claims of curing gay people in their 1979 book, "Homosexuality in Perspective." Given this vital new information, why hasn't Focus on the Family taken the opportunity to review and question the validity of its program? Wouldn't that be the moral course of action to take?
The hard truth is, Focus on the Family's leaders are only capable of loving people exactly like themselves, which explains their tremendous efforts to remake gays in their image. While their splashy road show may get high marks for good theatre, it's ultimately futile because their transparent version of "love" rarely wins converts and succeeds only at convincing most gay people to run out of the church door.
Wednesday, 10 June 2009 20:13
I'm on my way to Grand Rapids, Michigan to give a presentation at Grand Valley State University on the harm caused by the "ex-gay" industry.
My speech, followed by a panel discussion, is in response to Focus on the Family's traveling road show, Love Won Out, which will be in town on Saturday. Having countered several of these conferences, I must confess, I still don't understand what point they are trying to make.
If Focus on the Family's goal is to convert gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people into evangelical Christians, they are doing a lousy job. It seems convincing gay people to end their relationships is a far higher priority to this ministry than having gay people develop personal relationships with Jesus Christ.
For every guilt-ridden homosexual who temporarily falls under their spell, they lose hundreds, if not thousands, of gay people who view their conversion program as intolerant. If your ministry causes many gay people to write off not just Christianity, but all religion, by what measurement can you consider your evangelizing a success?
At Love Won Out, speakers go to great lengths to profess their deep concern over the mental and physical well being of homosexuals. It turns out, however, that the anti-gay sentiment expressed at these conferences may be hazardous to the health of GLBT people.
A new Emory University study concludes that the bans on same-sex marriage pushed by Focus on the Family can be tied to a rise in the rate o f HIV infection. The scientists found that a constitutional ban on marriage equality raised the rate by four cases per 100,000 people.
"We found the effects of tolerance for gays on HIV to be statistically significant and robust, they hold up under a range of empirical models," says Hugo Mialon, an assistant professor of economics. "Intolerance is deadly," Mialon said. "Bans on gay marriage codify intolerance, causing more gay people to shift to underground sexual behaviors that carry more risk."
Earlier this year, a study by San Francisco State's Caitlin Ryan concluded that "teens who experienced negative feedback (when they came out) were more than eight times as likely to have attempted suicide, nearly six times as vulnerable to severe depression and more than three times at risk of drug use."
So, if Love Won Out is truly concerned about the health of gay people, particularly teenagers, it will transform into a gay affirming ministry. To continue down their destructive path of judgmental condemnation is senseless and significantly harmful to the very GLBT people that Focus purports to want to help.
Of course, Focus on the Family will insist that they love gay people and just want to help those who are unhappy. But, isn't it a conflict of interest when you lobby to pass anti-gay laws that make gay people miserable and then offer yourself up as the panacea to the pain? Is it not hypocritical to sponsor a conference supposedly about love, where the main speaker is Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International?
Chambers hosts a Christian television show, Pure Passion, which pollutes the airwaves by repeatedly calling gay people "sexually broken" and "perverse." Exodus also sells "Pursuing Sexual Wholeness" a book authored by Andy Comiskey that says, "Satan delights in homosexual perversion." Such pronouncements are often accompanied by exorcisms given by churches affiliated with ex-gay ministries. Obviously, such extreme actions are anathema to creating a welcoming church environment for GLBT people.
Focus on the Family also claims its conferences are for parents, friends, family members or ministry leaders who want to "lovingly reach out with uncompromised faith."
Genuine love, of course, requires making the very compromises and sacrifices that Love Won Out is telling people are unnecessary. Rejecting a friend or family member's innate sexual orientation as sinful and defective, rarely leads to a healthy relationship based on trust and mutual respect.
Finally, the investigative reporter Thomas Maier just released a groundbreaking book, "Masters of Sex." In it, he reveals that the famed sex research team, Masters and Johnson, had fabricated claims of curing gay people in their 1979 book, "Homosexuality in Perspective." Given this vital new information, why hasn't Focus on the Family taken the opportunity to review and question the validity of its program? Wouldn't that be the moral course of action to take?
The hard truth is, Focus on the Family's leaders are only capable of loving people exactly like themselves, which explains their tremendous efforts to remake gays in their image. While their splashy road show may get high marks for good theatre, it's ultimately futile because their transparent version of "love" rarely wins converts and succeeds only at convincing most gay people to run out of the church door.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Drive to stop gay partnership law is dividing conservatives
Some worry that a failed referendum in Washington state would hurt their larger battle down the road.
By Kim Murphy
June 8, 2009
Reporting from Seattle — A campaign to roll back gay rights that kicked off in Washington state over the weekend has split the Christian conservative community, with some wondering whether it is the right time for a fight and others arguing that time may be running out.
On the heels of the recent California Supreme Court ruling that upheld Proposition 8's prohibition against same-sex marriage, conservative groups here began collecting signatures for a ballot referendum to block a new Washington state law that substantially expands rights for domestic partners.
The law that Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire signed in May has been dubbed the "everything but marriage" bill. When it takes effect in July, it will expand previous domestic partnership laws to include issues like adoption, child support, pensions and other public-employee benefits.
Washington's secretary of state approved the referendum petitions Friday and signature collections began over the weekend. If referendum backers collect 120,577 signatures by July 25, the law would be suspended pending a vote in November.
But some conservatives fear that public support for domestic partnership rights and a preoccupation with the economy could doom the effort -- and make it harder to battle same-sex marriage down the road.
"My concern is, in running a referendum, you're not really going to win," said the Rev. Joe Fuiten, founder of Positive Christian Agenda. "All you accomplish is you divide up the community and really alienate a lot of people from the church and from the gospel."
Fuiten recently circulated an e-mail asking Christian conservatives to consider the downside of picking this fight when polls show that most Washingtonians favor broad equal rights for domestic partners -- although they may feel differently about gay marriage.
An October poll by the University of Washington's Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race and Sexuality showed that 21% of those surveyed said there should be no legal recognition of gay and lesbian couples. But 37% supported same-sex marriage, and another 29% said same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals -- adding up to a 66% majority.
"I think we can win on the marriage issue, but if we deplete our capital of money and goodwill in a failed referendum, we will not have the strength to win the marriage battle," Fuiten wrote in his e-mail.
Yet referendum backers argue that public momentum is on their side.
"It's the last incremental step to gay marriage for gay activists," said Gary Randall, president of the Faith & Freedom Network, who is helping coordinate the signature campaign.
"We're not trying to take anything from anyone. We're simply trying to defend and keep marriage as it has always been throughout all of human history."
California, Oregon, New Jersey, New Hampshire and the District of Columbia have laws offering same-sex couples substantial partnership rights. A handful of states, most recently New Hampshire, allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.
Larry Stickney of the Washington Values Alliance, who also backs the referendum, told Fuiten that the recession could help defeat the law because more people were turning to religion after losing their jobs.
He also predicted that passage of a federal hate crimes law this year could introduce legal roadblocks to campaigning against same-sex partnerships.
"We may be running out of time to address this issue without fear of jail time," he responded to Fuiten's e-mail.
Supporters of the law expanding gay partnership rights aren't taking anything for granted.
"We're taking this threat very, very seriously," said Josh Friedes, campaign manager for Washington Families Standing Together, which has gathered support from labor unions, religious communities, immigration and civil rights groups.
He said the domestic partnership law provided barely a quarter of the rights available to regular married couples. For example, same-sex couples would not be able to file a joint federal income tax return.
"We're in this incredible economic crisis in the state of Washington, we're seeing unbelievable cuts to social services, and it's pretty shocking that during this downturn we would see organizations who are making it their priority taking away rights from families, and who are going to be forcing people to spend millions of dollars on a campaign to preserve their rights," Friedes said.
A "Decline to Sign" campaign already has garnered support from 30,000 Washington residents.
Another group, taking a chapter from tactical playbooks in California and Oregon, has started a website on which it has vowed to publicize the names of those who sign petitions in favor of the referendum to block the partnership law.
Randall, of the petition campaign, said people had already contacted him out of concern that they might be turned down for a job if their signing became public.
But, he said, "It has also had a positive effect, in the sense that we've probably received 800 to 1,000 e-mails from people who have seen the news coverage and said . . . 'Now I'm going to sign it because they're not going to intimidate me.' "
Friedes said that mainstream gay rights groups opposing the referendum had no connection to the "who signed" website, adding that it could harm the gay rights cause.
"Our goal is to . . . create a civil discourse that focuses on meeting the needs of Washington families," he said. "And instead, I think what we're seeing is . . . a very small set of people on both sides of the issues who are yelling at each other."
kim.murphy@latimes.com
By Kim Murphy
June 8, 2009
Reporting from Seattle — A campaign to roll back gay rights that kicked off in Washington state over the weekend has split the Christian conservative community, with some wondering whether it is the right time for a fight and others arguing that time may be running out.
On the heels of the recent California Supreme Court ruling that upheld Proposition 8's prohibition against same-sex marriage, conservative groups here began collecting signatures for a ballot referendum to block a new Washington state law that substantially expands rights for domestic partners.
The law that Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire signed in May has been dubbed the "everything but marriage" bill. When it takes effect in July, it will expand previous domestic partnership laws to include issues like adoption, child support, pensions and other public-employee benefits.
Washington's secretary of state approved the referendum petitions Friday and signature collections began over the weekend. If referendum backers collect 120,577 signatures by July 25, the law would be suspended pending a vote in November.
But some conservatives fear that public support for domestic partnership rights and a preoccupation with the economy could doom the effort -- and make it harder to battle same-sex marriage down the road.
"My concern is, in running a referendum, you're not really going to win," said the Rev. Joe Fuiten, founder of Positive Christian Agenda. "All you accomplish is you divide up the community and really alienate a lot of people from the church and from the gospel."
Fuiten recently circulated an e-mail asking Christian conservatives to consider the downside of picking this fight when polls show that most Washingtonians favor broad equal rights for domestic partners -- although they may feel differently about gay marriage.
An October poll by the University of Washington's Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race and Sexuality showed that 21% of those surveyed said there should be no legal recognition of gay and lesbian couples. But 37% supported same-sex marriage, and another 29% said same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as heterosexuals -- adding up to a 66% majority.
"I think we can win on the marriage issue, but if we deplete our capital of money and goodwill in a failed referendum, we will not have the strength to win the marriage battle," Fuiten wrote in his e-mail.
Yet referendum backers argue that public momentum is on their side.
"It's the last incremental step to gay marriage for gay activists," said Gary Randall, president of the Faith & Freedom Network, who is helping coordinate the signature campaign.
"We're not trying to take anything from anyone. We're simply trying to defend and keep marriage as it has always been throughout all of human history."
California, Oregon, New Jersey, New Hampshire and the District of Columbia have laws offering same-sex couples substantial partnership rights. A handful of states, most recently New Hampshire, allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.
Larry Stickney of the Washington Values Alliance, who also backs the referendum, told Fuiten that the recession could help defeat the law because more people were turning to religion after losing their jobs.
He also predicted that passage of a federal hate crimes law this year could introduce legal roadblocks to campaigning against same-sex partnerships.
"We may be running out of time to address this issue without fear of jail time," he responded to Fuiten's e-mail.
Supporters of the law expanding gay partnership rights aren't taking anything for granted.
"We're taking this threat very, very seriously," said Josh Friedes, campaign manager for Washington Families Standing Together, which has gathered support from labor unions, religious communities, immigration and civil rights groups.
He said the domestic partnership law provided barely a quarter of the rights available to regular married couples. For example, same-sex couples would not be able to file a joint federal income tax return.
"We're in this incredible economic crisis in the state of Washington, we're seeing unbelievable cuts to social services, and it's pretty shocking that during this downturn we would see organizations who are making it their priority taking away rights from families, and who are going to be forcing people to spend millions of dollars on a campaign to preserve their rights," Friedes said.
A "Decline to Sign" campaign already has garnered support from 30,000 Washington residents.
Another group, taking a chapter from tactical playbooks in California and Oregon, has started a website on which it has vowed to publicize the names of those who sign petitions in favor of the referendum to block the partnership law.
Randall, of the petition campaign, said people had already contacted him out of concern that they might be turned down for a job if their signing became public.
But, he said, "It has also had a positive effect, in the sense that we've probably received 800 to 1,000 e-mails from people who have seen the news coverage and said . . . 'Now I'm going to sign it because they're not going to intimidate me.' "
Friedes said that mainstream gay rights groups opposing the referendum had no connection to the "who signed" website, adding that it could harm the gay rights cause.
"Our goal is to . . . create a civil discourse that focuses on meeting the needs of Washington families," he said. "And instead, I think what we're seeing is . . . a very small set of people on both sides of the issues who are yelling at each other."
kim.murphy@latimes.com
Gays push for partner immigration rights
Matthew B. Stannard,Tyche Hendricks, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, June 6, 2009
As Congress and immigrant advocacy groups gear up for the annual tussle over comprehensive immigration reform, a proposal by San Jose Rep. Mike Honda is opening up a new angle on the debate - one that some groups warn could overshadow years of effort at building consensus.
Honda's Reuniting Families Act, introduced Thursday, would extend to "permanent partners" the same naturalization rights accorded to spouses under the bill, allowing gay and lesbian Americans to seek legal residency for their immigrant same-sex partners.
"How do you define 'all families'? Traditional heterosexual families but also permanent partners, recognized as having a legitimate long-term relationship," Honda, a Democrat, said this week. "It's a civil rights issue. The idea of being on the outside looking in is something we're familiar with, it's un-American. ... I want to make sure we do the right thing the first time."
The proposal would address situations like that of Shirley Tan, a Pacifica mother who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, introduced a similar bill this week in the Senate.
Tan, a housewife who lives with Jay Mercado, her registered domestic partner, and their 12-year-old twin sons - all citizens - faced deportation to the Philippines in April until that order was blocked by special legislation sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, had earlier obtained a three-week stay of the order.
"It was horrible - it was as if the world came down on me," Tan said by telephone Friday as she was visiting the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum with her family.
Were Tan and Mercado a heterosexual married couple, Tan would probably have been eligible for a green card. A survey commissioned in 2000 by Immigration Equality, a national organization fighting for equal immigration rights for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive community, reported about 37,000 same-sex couples in the country where one partner was a foreign citizen.
"The thought of being separated from my family, my boys, because they're my life, my everything," Tan said. "There should be equality. This is what I believe America should stand for. ... Families shouldn't be torn apart."
Honda introduced his bill, which addresses a range of other immigration issues, in advance of a White House meeting on immigration policy, scheduled for June 17, to which President Obama is inviting congressional leaders from both parties. Hundreds of immigrant advocates converged on Washington this week to show support for comprehensive immigration reform, including legalization of undocumented immigrants and an increase in green cards for family-based immigration.
But Honda's proposal to extend to same-sex partners the legal residency rights now accorded to spouses has generated controversy within the coalition of groups seeking reform - with some of those groups warning the issue could fracture the movement.
"I do believe it could be a death knell," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. "We won't support legislation - period - that includes the Honda same-sex component."
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops this week also criticized Honda's bill, saying that while it strongly supported reform to help reunify immigrant families, the conference strongly opposed efforts to "erode the institution of marriage and family by according marriage-like immigration benefits" to same-sex relationships.
Rodriguez insisted that the issue is not one solely of moral opposition, noting that while he opposes same-sex marriage, he also has spoken against homophobia in the church. But immigration reform is going to be tricky enough to sell in Congress, he said, without adding divisive issues.
"We already know that in order to pass comprehensive immigration reform, we need to engage some of the Blue Dog Democrats, some of the centrists and the moderates," he said. "If we add on the same-sex component, many of the Blue Dog Democrats are going to say absolutely not, we're not going to sign on." The Blue Dogs are a group of conservative Democrats.
Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors limited immigration, said Honda's proposal could also lead to increased fraud because same-sex couples don't have the same clear documentation - a marriage certificate - to prove to immigration officials that they have the relationship they claim.
"Our whole immigration system is based on documents," she said.
But Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, said the bill includes requirements for proving that a same-sex couple has a significant long-standing commitment, using financial documents, mortgages and wills - the kind of documentation she said businesses use when confirming eligibility for domestic partnership benefits.
Nor should the same-sex benefit scuttle the coalition building for immigration reform, Tiven said - in fact, she added, the addition of experienced grassroots activists from the LGBT community might more than make up for any allies lost over the issue.
"There are millions and millions of families that desperately need immigration reform," she said. "Some of those families are gay, most of those families are not, and I hope that people who really genuinely care about families and immigration reform will really act to protect families that need help."
Saturday, June 6, 2009
As Congress and immigrant advocacy groups gear up for the annual tussle over comprehensive immigration reform, a proposal by San Jose Rep. Mike Honda is opening up a new angle on the debate - one that some groups warn could overshadow years of effort at building consensus.
Honda's Reuniting Families Act, introduced Thursday, would extend to "permanent partners" the same naturalization rights accorded to spouses under the bill, allowing gay and lesbian Americans to seek legal residency for their immigrant same-sex partners.
"How do you define 'all families'? Traditional heterosexual families but also permanent partners, recognized as having a legitimate long-term relationship," Honda, a Democrat, said this week. "It's a civil rights issue. The idea of being on the outside looking in is something we're familiar with, it's un-American. ... I want to make sure we do the right thing the first time."
The proposal would address situations like that of Shirley Tan, a Pacifica mother who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, introduced a similar bill this week in the Senate.
Tan, a housewife who lives with Jay Mercado, her registered domestic partner, and their 12-year-old twin sons - all citizens - faced deportation to the Philippines in April until that order was blocked by special legislation sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, had earlier obtained a three-week stay of the order.
"It was horrible - it was as if the world came down on me," Tan said by telephone Friday as she was visiting the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum with her family.
Were Tan and Mercado a heterosexual married couple, Tan would probably have been eligible for a green card. A survey commissioned in 2000 by Immigration Equality, a national organization fighting for equal immigration rights for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive community, reported about 37,000 same-sex couples in the country where one partner was a foreign citizen.
"The thought of being separated from my family, my boys, because they're my life, my everything," Tan said. "There should be equality. This is what I believe America should stand for. ... Families shouldn't be torn apart."
Honda introduced his bill, which addresses a range of other immigration issues, in advance of a White House meeting on immigration policy, scheduled for June 17, to which President Obama is inviting congressional leaders from both parties. Hundreds of immigrant advocates converged on Washington this week to show support for comprehensive immigration reform, including legalization of undocumented immigrants and an increase in green cards for family-based immigration.
But Honda's proposal to extend to same-sex partners the legal residency rights now accorded to spouses has generated controversy within the coalition of groups seeking reform - with some of those groups warning the issue could fracture the movement.
"I do believe it could be a death knell," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. "We won't support legislation - period - that includes the Honda same-sex component."
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops this week also criticized Honda's bill, saying that while it strongly supported reform to help reunify immigrant families, the conference strongly opposed efforts to "erode the institution of marriage and family by according marriage-like immigration benefits" to same-sex relationships.
Rodriguez insisted that the issue is not one solely of moral opposition, noting that while he opposes same-sex marriage, he also has spoken against homophobia in the church. But immigration reform is going to be tricky enough to sell in Congress, he said, without adding divisive issues.
"We already know that in order to pass comprehensive immigration reform, we need to engage some of the Blue Dog Democrats, some of the centrists and the moderates," he said. "If we add on the same-sex component, many of the Blue Dog Democrats are going to say absolutely not, we're not going to sign on." The Blue Dogs are a group of conservative Democrats.
Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors limited immigration, said Honda's proposal could also lead to increased fraud because same-sex couples don't have the same clear documentation - a marriage certificate - to prove to immigration officials that they have the relationship they claim.
"Our whole immigration system is based on documents," she said.
But Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, said the bill includes requirements for proving that a same-sex couple has a significant long-standing commitment, using financial documents, mortgages and wills - the kind of documentation she said businesses use when confirming eligibility for domestic partnership benefits.
Nor should the same-sex benefit scuttle the coalition building for immigration reform, Tiven said - in fact, she added, the addition of experienced grassroots activists from the LGBT community might more than make up for any allies lost over the issue.
"There are millions and millions of families that desperately need immigration reform," she said. "Some of those families are gay, most of those families are not, and I hope that people who really genuinely care about families and immigration reform will really act to protect families that need help."
My Turn: Christian beliefs come in many shades
June 6, 2009
By Ken Wolvington
As the rhetoric in Vermont surrounding the issue of gay marriage gradually subsides, it's worth reflecting on the ongoing religious debate that's been taking place - more or less subliminally. Obviously, a large measure of the opposition to the marriage equality bill came from self-professed Christians. Yet, at the same time, there was strong support for gay marriage from other Christians, including a rather significant number of Christian clergy. Clearly, there was - and is - no monolithic "Christian position" on the issue.
Conservative Christians usually base their condemnation of homosexuality (and all of its ramifications) on select biblical passages found in both the Bible's Old and New testaments. Their position often seems to come across as, "It's in the Bible. God has spoken. End of discussion." Many, if not most, conservative Christians believe the Bible to be the "infallible and inerrant word of God."
On the other hand, progressive Christians are more inclined to view the Bible as a collection of inspired ancient texts, derived in part from oral tradition handed down through the ages, together with Hebrew and Greek texts authored by a variety of prophets and apostles over a period of centuries. Many contemporary biblical scholars agree that, over the years, Scripture has suffered from "copyists' errors and scribal emendations," to quote from the New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV).
It should be noted that the canon of both Hebrew Scriptures the New Testament was essentially closed by the year 367 C.E. If we are to rely on Scripture alone as the final word of God, does that mean that God has had nothing new to say for the past 1,700 years? Are we to be bound forever by the context, circumstances and rules that existed in society centuries ago? Is there no room for learning from human experience and the discoveries of modern science?
Conservative Christians seem drawn to the need for rules - preferably in black and white. They rail against "relativism." But if God's plan for mankind was as simple as a rulebook, it would have been unnecessary to go beyond the Torah - "The Law." Yet in the fullness of Hebrew Scriptures we find a plethora of prophets who provided all kinds of additional advice to Israel: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, to name a few, each of them speaking from their particular circumstance - and experience.
St. Paul authored most of the commentaries and admonitions on which the Christian Church was founded, but even he admitted to "seeing in a mirror, dimly." Surely, there must be authenticity to some of what has been learned in the nearly 2,000 years since the time of his writings.
Conservative Christians regard homosexual practice as sinful, though they are quick to demonstrate their Christian compassion by adding, "We're to hate the sin, but love the sinner." This familiar little aphorism has at its core the belief that homosexuality is an elective lifestyle. Were it not a "choice," it would be impossible to separate the sin from the sinner, and it would be difficult if not impossible to hate one and not the other.
Same-sex attraction is not limited to humans alone, as many animal species have been identified that display homosexual tendencies, for example, cows "humping" cows. It's doubtful that they do so as a lifestyle "choice."
The debate over whether sexual orientation is "nature versus nurture" bears a strong resemblance to how the world felt about left-handedness for countless generations. Being left-handed was considered abnormal, if not worse. Even the Bible placed Jesus at "the right hand of God." Thankfully, through science and experience, we know today that left-handedness is something that is inborn and natural.
Christians will differ over these matters for many generations to come, and nothing that has been said here will change that. But it's important for readers to understand that, like the colors in a rainbow, there are differing shades of Christian belief.
Ken Wolvington lives in Burlington.
By Ken Wolvington
As the rhetoric in Vermont surrounding the issue of gay marriage gradually subsides, it's worth reflecting on the ongoing religious debate that's been taking place - more or less subliminally. Obviously, a large measure of the opposition to the marriage equality bill came from self-professed Christians. Yet, at the same time, there was strong support for gay marriage from other Christians, including a rather significant number of Christian clergy. Clearly, there was - and is - no monolithic "Christian position" on the issue.
Conservative Christians usually base their condemnation of homosexuality (and all of its ramifications) on select biblical passages found in both the Bible's Old and New testaments. Their position often seems to come across as, "It's in the Bible. God has spoken. End of discussion." Many, if not most, conservative Christians believe the Bible to be the "infallible and inerrant word of God."
On the other hand, progressive Christians are more inclined to view the Bible as a collection of inspired ancient texts, derived in part from oral tradition handed down through the ages, together with Hebrew and Greek texts authored by a variety of prophets and apostles over a period of centuries. Many contemporary biblical scholars agree that, over the years, Scripture has suffered from "copyists' errors and scribal emendations," to quote from the New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV).
It should be noted that the canon of both Hebrew Scriptures the New Testament was essentially closed by the year 367 C.E. If we are to rely on Scripture alone as the final word of God, does that mean that God has had nothing new to say for the past 1,700 years? Are we to be bound forever by the context, circumstances and rules that existed in society centuries ago? Is there no room for learning from human experience and the discoveries of modern science?
Conservative Christians seem drawn to the need for rules - preferably in black and white. They rail against "relativism." But if God's plan for mankind was as simple as a rulebook, it would have been unnecessary to go beyond the Torah - "The Law." Yet in the fullness of Hebrew Scriptures we find a plethora of prophets who provided all kinds of additional advice to Israel: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, to name a few, each of them speaking from their particular circumstance - and experience.
St. Paul authored most of the commentaries and admonitions on which the Christian Church was founded, but even he admitted to "seeing in a mirror, dimly." Surely, there must be authenticity to some of what has been learned in the nearly 2,000 years since the time of his writings.
Conservative Christians regard homosexual practice as sinful, though they are quick to demonstrate their Christian compassion by adding, "We're to hate the sin, but love the sinner." This familiar little aphorism has at its core the belief that homosexuality is an elective lifestyle. Were it not a "choice," it would be impossible to separate the sin from the sinner, and it would be difficult if not impossible to hate one and not the other.
Same-sex attraction is not limited to humans alone, as many animal species have been identified that display homosexual tendencies, for example, cows "humping" cows. It's doubtful that they do so as a lifestyle "choice."
The debate over whether sexual orientation is "nature versus nurture" bears a strong resemblance to how the world felt about left-handedness for countless generations. Being left-handed was considered abnormal, if not worse. Even the Bible placed Jesus at "the right hand of God." Thankfully, through science and experience, we know today that left-handedness is something that is inborn and natural.
Christians will differ over these matters for many generations to come, and nothing that has been said here will change that. But it's important for readers to understand that, like the colors in a rainbow, there are differing shades of Christian belief.
Ken Wolvington lives in Burlington.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
From the ashes
by Allen McAlister
Spiritual Writer
Posted 06/01/2009
Looking back on Azariah Southworth's past year, it would be easy to say things have been difficult.
Southworth worked as a host of Remix TV, a Christian Music Video program, for a year and a half. Then, in April 2008 Southworthcame out, and found that he and his faith were put on trial.
He quickly became a hot topic as blogs and chat rooms once again began debating whether or not an individual can be both gay and Christian. He lost some of his closest friends and his job at Remix TV. His relationship with his family was further strained.
But, as Proverbs 27:17 says, “As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.” (NIV) Southworth held tight to his conviction knowing that there is healing for the pain received from others.
He maintained the rights to the show, "Remix", a silver lining among skies filled with gloom. Then, a few months later, he was given the chance to break away from the infamy surrounding his situation when he was invited to join the Soulforce Q 2008 Equality Ride. Soulforce is a group organized to “fight for freedom for GLBT individuals from religious and political oppression through the practice of relentless nonviolent resistance.” The Equality Ride is a nationwide tour that work specifically with students and the academic environment by visiting 15 schools.
While it was a great opportunity for him to use his celebrity in a positive way as an openly gay Christian, The Equality Ride also presented a struggle.
“What I experienced on the Equality Ride from the Christian schools we visited often drove me to the point of walking away from everything that even appeared to be Christian,” Southworth said.
As the group traveled from school to school, they were greeted with numerous condemnations and at least one student was expelled just for speaking with them. But by the end of the tour, Southworth's faith had been strengthened through his walk with Christ, he said.
"I believe GLBT people who face oppression and spiritual violence have a great advantage when striving to obtain the wisdom and knowledge of who God is, but sadly so many of us give up because of hurt and offenses,” Southworth said.
Many times, people get focused on how they have been wronged by the Christian community and begin point fingers, Southworth said. That's why he chooses the high road and let's things run their course. Now, he's looking to the future with plans of filming a pilot for Remix TV in Los Angeles, Cali.
“It is important for us to be able to separate what humans do to us from what God does to us," Southworth said. "Too often, many of us are not able to get past the hurt done to us by Christians to the point that we can’t separate Christ’s followers from Christ. Instead, embrace your faith and pursue Christ with everything you have. Pursue Him by forgiving others, loving others, and giving to others.”
Spiritual Writer
Posted 06/01/2009
Looking back on Azariah Southworth's past year, it would be easy to say things have been difficult.
Southworth worked as a host of Remix TV, a Christian Music Video program, for a year and a half. Then, in April 2008 Southworthcame out, and found that he and his faith were put on trial.
He quickly became a hot topic as blogs and chat rooms once again began debating whether or not an individual can be both gay and Christian. He lost some of his closest friends and his job at Remix TV. His relationship with his family was further strained.
But, as Proverbs 27:17 says, “As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.” (NIV) Southworth held tight to his conviction knowing that there is healing for the pain received from others.
He maintained the rights to the show, "Remix", a silver lining among skies filled with gloom. Then, a few months later, he was given the chance to break away from the infamy surrounding his situation when he was invited to join the Soulforce Q 2008 Equality Ride. Soulforce is a group organized to “fight for freedom for GLBT individuals from religious and political oppression through the practice of relentless nonviolent resistance.” The Equality Ride is a nationwide tour that work specifically with students and the academic environment by visiting 15 schools.
While it was a great opportunity for him to use his celebrity in a positive way as an openly gay Christian, The Equality Ride also presented a struggle.
“What I experienced on the Equality Ride from the Christian schools we visited often drove me to the point of walking away from everything that even appeared to be Christian,” Southworth said.
As the group traveled from school to school, they were greeted with numerous condemnations and at least one student was expelled just for speaking with them. But by the end of the tour, Southworth's faith had been strengthened through his walk with Christ, he said.
"I believe GLBT people who face oppression and spiritual violence have a great advantage when striving to obtain the wisdom and knowledge of who God is, but sadly so many of us give up because of hurt and offenses,” Southworth said.
Many times, people get focused on how they have been wronged by the Christian community and begin point fingers, Southworth said. That's why he chooses the high road and let's things run their course. Now, he's looking to the future with plans of filming a pilot for Remix TV in Los Angeles, Cali.
“It is important for us to be able to separate what humans do to us from what God does to us," Southworth said. "Too often, many of us are not able to get past the hurt done to us by Christians to the point that we can’t separate Christ’s followers from Christ. Instead, embrace your faith and pursue Christ with everything you have. Pursue Him by forgiving others, loving others, and giving to others.”
Evangelical: Christians Owe Gays Apology
June 01, 2009
A prominent professor of Christian ethics says Christians should ask for forgiveness from gays and lesbians in his review of a new book chronicling the pain experienced by gay youths when religion is used to justify prejudice and discrimination.
In his review of furniture designer Mitchell Gold’s book Crisis, an anthology of stories recounting pain caused by growing up gay in America, Dr. David P. Gushee says Christians need to seek forgiveness from gays and lesbians.
“But after reading these stories, it seems to me that Christians have something to request from God, and from the gays and lesbians among us," he concludes. "We need forgiveness."
Gushee's review, “Church-based Hate,” appears in Tuesday’s edition of The Christian Century.
A prominent professor of Christian ethics says Christians should ask for forgiveness from gays and lesbians in his review of a new book chronicling the pain experienced by gay youths when religion is used to justify prejudice and discrimination.
In his review of furniture designer Mitchell Gold’s book Crisis, an anthology of stories recounting pain caused by growing up gay in America, Dr. David P. Gushee says Christians need to seek forgiveness from gays and lesbians.
“But after reading these stories, it seems to me that Christians have something to request from God, and from the gays and lesbians among us," he concludes. "We need forgiveness."
Gushee's review, “Church-based Hate,” appears in Tuesday’s edition of The Christian Century.
Evangelicals frustrated by Obama's 'Gay Pride' decree
Posted on Jun 2, 2009 | by Michael Foust
WASHINGTON (BP)--President Obama Monday named June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month" issuing a proclamation that goes even further than those of former President Clinton in its pro-homosexuality slant.
Clinton was the last president to issue such a proclamation, first doing so in 1999 and then in 2000 before he left office. Obama's 572-word proclamation calls for ending the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy -- which was put in place under Clinton -- and also includes the phrase "transgender" for a first time. Clinton's proclamations never referenced transgenderism, a category that includes cross-dressers and people undergoing sex change operations. Another first: Obama's proclamation reiterates his support for same-sex civil union laws.
President George W. Bush never issued a proclamation commemorating Gay Pride Month. Clinton's proclamations differed from Obama's in calling June "Gay and Lesbian Pride Month," leaving out "bisexual" and "transgender."
"The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done," Obama's proclamation reads. "During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
The proclamation is posted on the White House website but is difficult to find and as of Tuesday afternoon was not listed under the website's category of proclamations -- a fact that some homosexual activists were criticizing. (The link is available at the end of this story.)
Evangelicals voiced strong disagreement with Obama's proclamation, much like they did in 1999 when Clinton issued his proclamation and Southern Baptist Convention messengers responded by passing a resolution rebuking Clinton for doing so.
"For a president who pledged to bring us together, Mr. Obama persists in doing the exact opposite on all things homosexual," Bob Stith, the Southern Baptist national strategist for gender issues and representative of the denomination's Task Force on Ministry to Homosexuals, told Baptist Press. "This issue for most evangelical Christians is not bias or prejudice. It is simply maintaining the freedom to speak the truth about Scripture. It is one thing to be loving and tolerant. It is something else altogether to encourage pride in what God clearly says is sin.
"The bottom line," Stith added, "is that if God defines something as sin, we do no one any favors by attempting to blur those lines. Nor will we be doing future generations any favors by obliterating barriers God has put up for our protection. On several occasions the Bible uses the phrase 'every man did that which was right in his own eyes.' In every case it turned out badly."
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, criticized Obama for once again calling for the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which prevents homosexuals from serving openly in the military.
"This, according to people in the military, would have catastrophic consequences for our nation in a time of war," Land told BP.
"Some surveys of military personnel indicate that perhaps as high as 10 percent of the all-volunteer forces will resign from the military if 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is rescinded," he said, quoting a December Military Times poll. "And it would hit heaviest in the non-commissioned officer ranks -- the sergeants and the chiefs and the people who make it go at the operational level. It would seriously impact our military's ability to do the job that we've asked them to do in keeping us safe."
The homosexual community traditionally has called June "Gay Pride Month" to commemorate the 1969 Stonewall Inn riots, which took place in New York City and are viewed as helping launch the modern "gay rights" movement. In his proclamation Obama says he is proud to be the first president to "appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an administration." He also calls for passage of a hate crimes bill and for "ensuring adoption rights" for homosexuals.
Noting the stark contrast between the previous administration and the current administration, Land said, "Elections have consequences." Underscoring how far the "gay rights community" has come in less than two decades, Land recalled how he and other religious leaders met with former President George H.W. Bush and complained about Bush becoming the first president to invite representatives of homosexual organizations to the White House. "We've come a long way," Land said, emphasizing it has not been for the better.
"Those of us who believe in the continuing truth of God's revealed Word in Scripture," Land said, "would not consider the distance traveled between the issue in our meeting with President George H.W. Bush and President Obama's proclamation as progress, but a further sign of the moral and spiritual deterioration of our culture."
Said Stith: "God has not just issued a laundry list of arbitrary rules for His creation. He has made it clear that He desires for us to experience His joy and peace. As the creator He also understands what will make that possible -- and what will impede His plan for us. Clearly the true loving thing to do is to hold up God's standard and encourage all people to strive for that. To declare pride in anything that God says is sin is not love. It is no different than removing a sign that says 'Road closed. Bridge out.'"
Following is the full text of Obama's proclamation:
"Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Out of this resistance, the LGBT rights movement in America was born. During LGBT Pride Month, we commemorate the events of June 1969 and commit to achieving equal justice under law for LGBT Americans.
"LGBT Americans have made, and continue to make, great and lasting contributions that continue to strengthen the fabric of American society. There are many well-respected LGBT leaders in all professional fields, including the arts and business communities. LGBT Americans also mobilized the Nation to respond to the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic and have played a vital role in broadening this country's response to the HIV pandemic.
"Due in no small part to the determination and dedication of the LGBT rights movement, more LGBT Americans are living their lives openly today than ever before. I am proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration. These individuals embody the best qualities we seek in public servants, and across my Administration -- in both the White House and the Federal agencies -- openly LGBT employees are doing their jobs with distinction and professionalism.
"The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done. LGBT youth should feel safe to learn without the fear of harassment, and LGBT families and seniors should be allowed to live their lives with dignity and respect.
"My Administration has partnered with the LGBT community to advance a wide range of initiatives. At the international level, I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security. We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States.
"These issues affect not only the LGBT community, but also our entire Nation. As long as the promise of equality for all remains unfulfilled, all Americans are affected. If we can work together to advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded, every American will benefit. During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
"NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to turn back discrimination and prejudice everywhere it exists.
"IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third."
--30--
Michael Foust is an assistant editor of Baptist Press. Obama's proclamation also can be found on the White House website at www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Presidential-Proclamation-LGBT-Pride-Month. For more information about the SBC's outreach to homosexuals, visit www.sbcthewayout.com.
WASHINGTON (BP)--President Obama Monday named June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month" issuing a proclamation that goes even further than those of former President Clinton in its pro-homosexuality slant.
Clinton was the last president to issue such a proclamation, first doing so in 1999 and then in 2000 before he left office. Obama's 572-word proclamation calls for ending the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy -- which was put in place under Clinton -- and also includes the phrase "transgender" for a first time. Clinton's proclamations never referenced transgenderism, a category that includes cross-dressers and people undergoing sex change operations. Another first: Obama's proclamation reiterates his support for same-sex civil union laws.
President George W. Bush never issued a proclamation commemorating Gay Pride Month. Clinton's proclamations differed from Obama's in calling June "Gay and Lesbian Pride Month," leaving out "bisexual" and "transgender."
"The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done," Obama's proclamation reads. "During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."
The proclamation is posted on the White House website but is difficult to find and as of Tuesday afternoon was not listed under the website's category of proclamations -- a fact that some homosexual activists were criticizing. (The link is available at the end of this story.)
Evangelicals voiced strong disagreement with Obama's proclamation, much like they did in 1999 when Clinton issued his proclamation and Southern Baptist Convention messengers responded by passing a resolution rebuking Clinton for doing so.
"For a president who pledged to bring us together, Mr. Obama persists in doing the exact opposite on all things homosexual," Bob Stith, the Southern Baptist national strategist for gender issues and representative of the denomination's Task Force on Ministry to Homosexuals, told Baptist Press. "This issue for most evangelical Christians is not bias or prejudice. It is simply maintaining the freedom to speak the truth about Scripture. It is one thing to be loving and tolerant. It is something else altogether to encourage pride in what God clearly says is sin.
"The bottom line," Stith added, "is that if God defines something as sin, we do no one any favors by attempting to blur those lines. Nor will we be doing future generations any favors by obliterating barriers God has put up for our protection. On several occasions the Bible uses the phrase 'every man did that which was right in his own eyes.' In every case it turned out badly."
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, criticized Obama for once again calling for the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which prevents homosexuals from serving openly in the military.
"This, according to people in the military, would have catastrophic consequences for our nation in a time of war," Land told BP.
"Some surveys of military personnel indicate that perhaps as high as 10 percent of the all-volunteer forces will resign from the military if 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is rescinded," he said, quoting a December Military Times poll. "And it would hit heaviest in the non-commissioned officer ranks -- the sergeants and the chiefs and the people who make it go at the operational level. It would seriously impact our military's ability to do the job that we've asked them to do in keeping us safe."
The homosexual community traditionally has called June "Gay Pride Month" to commemorate the 1969 Stonewall Inn riots, which took place in New York City and are viewed as helping launch the modern "gay rights" movement. In his proclamation Obama says he is proud to be the first president to "appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an administration." He also calls for passage of a hate crimes bill and for "ensuring adoption rights" for homosexuals.
Noting the stark contrast between the previous administration and the current administration, Land said, "Elections have consequences." Underscoring how far the "gay rights community" has come in less than two decades, Land recalled how he and other religious leaders met with former President George H.W. Bush and complained about Bush becoming the first president to invite representatives of homosexual organizations to the White House. "We've come a long way," Land said, emphasizing it has not been for the better.
"Those of us who believe in the continuing truth of God's revealed Word in Scripture," Land said, "would not consider the distance traveled between the issue in our meeting with President George H.W. Bush and President Obama's proclamation as progress, but a further sign of the moral and spiritual deterioration of our culture."
Said Stith: "God has not just issued a laundry list of arbitrary rules for His creation. He has made it clear that He desires for us to experience His joy and peace. As the creator He also understands what will make that possible -- and what will impede His plan for us. Clearly the true loving thing to do is to hold up God's standard and encourage all people to strive for that. To declare pride in anything that God says is sin is not love. It is no different than removing a sign that says 'Road closed. Bridge out.'"
Following is the full text of Obama's proclamation:
"Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Out of this resistance, the LGBT rights movement in America was born. During LGBT Pride Month, we commemorate the events of June 1969 and commit to achieving equal justice under law for LGBT Americans.
"LGBT Americans have made, and continue to make, great and lasting contributions that continue to strengthen the fabric of American society. There are many well-respected LGBT leaders in all professional fields, including the arts and business communities. LGBT Americans also mobilized the Nation to respond to the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic and have played a vital role in broadening this country's response to the HIV pandemic.
"Due in no small part to the determination and dedication of the LGBT rights movement, more LGBT Americans are living their lives openly today than ever before. I am proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration. These individuals embody the best qualities we seek in public servants, and across my Administration -- in both the White House and the Federal agencies -- openly LGBT employees are doing their jobs with distinction and professionalism.
"The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done. LGBT youth should feel safe to learn without the fear of harassment, and LGBT families and seniors should be allowed to live their lives with dignity and respect.
"My Administration has partnered with the LGBT community to advance a wide range of initiatives. At the international level, I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security. We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States.
"These issues affect not only the LGBT community, but also our entire Nation. As long as the promise of equality for all remains unfulfilled, all Americans are affected. If we can work together to advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded, every American will benefit. During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
"NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to turn back discrimination and prejudice everywhere it exists.
"IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third."
--30--
Michael Foust is an assistant editor of Baptist Press. Obama's proclamation also can be found on the White House website at www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Presidential-Proclamation-LGBT-Pride-Month. For more information about the SBC's outreach to homosexuals, visit www.sbcthewayout.com.
Bill Proposes Immigration Rights for Gay Couples
June 3, 2009
Bill Proposes Immigration Rights for Gay Couples
By JULIA PRESTON
Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Democrat from Vermont who is the powerful chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is adding another controversial ingredient to the volatile mix of an immigration debate that President Obama has said he hopes to spur in Congress before the end of the year.
Mr. Leahy has offered a bill that would allow American citizens and legal immigrants to seek residency in the United States for their same-sex partners, just as spouses now petition for foreign-born husbands and wives.
The senator has said the bill should be part of any broad immigration legislation that Congress considers. To highlight his initiative, known as the Uniting American Families Act, Mr. Leahy is holding a hearing on Wednesday to discuss it in the full Judiciary Committee, bypassing the usual subcommittee hearings.
Also this week, immigrant advocacy groups and labor organizations are opening a nationwide campaign to hold President Obama to his recent pledge to initiate a Congressional debate on immigration legislation later this year.
Small-scale rallies took place on Monday in Los Angeles and some 40 other locations, and immigration groups are converging on Washington on Wednesday for three days of strategy meetings.
The Obama administration, juggling an array of huge and pressing issues on the economy and health care reform, has encouraged the mobilization of immigration advocates, especially Latino groups, while avoiding any legislative battles for now on the prickly topic of immigration. President Obama has invited a bipartisan group of lawmakers to the White House next Monday to “launch a policy conversation” about immigration, an administration official said.
The president wants to “identify areas of agreement, and areas where we still have work to do,” said the official, who would only speak on background because the final plans for the meeting were not settled.
The most contentious part of the immigration legislation that the administration supports, which is known as comprehensive immigration reform, is a program to give legal status to more than 11 million illegal immigrants living in the country. But current proposals also include a variety of measures intended, like Senator Leahy’s, to expand or streamline the legal immigration system.
Mr. Leahy’s proposal for same-sex immigration benefits was not included in the immigration legislation that the Bush administration brought forward in 2007, which failed after a firestorm of opposition, mainly from Republican voters.
Groups backing the overhaul this year have cobbled together a wide-ranging but fragile coalition that includes Latino and black groups, Roman Catholic and evangelical Christian churches, farm workers and commercial farmers, and some employer groups. In contrast to 2007, organized labor is united this time around in supporting the overhaul.
The political fault lines opened by Senator Leahy’s same-sex bill quickly became apparent this week. In a letter sent Tuesday, Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City, the chairman of the Catholic bishops’ Committee on Migration, wrote that the Uniting American Families Act would “erode the institution of marriage and family,” by taking a position “that is contrary to the very nature of marriage which pre-dates the Church and the State.”
Bishop Wester addressed his letter to Representative Michael M. Honda, a California Democrat who has said he will introduce an immigration bill containing similar same-sex provisions in the House this week.
J. Kevin Appleby, the immigration policy director for the bishops’ conference, said, “The last thing the national immigration debate needs is another politically divisive issue added to the mix.”
But Senator Leahy said the bill would eliminate discrimination in immigration law against gay and lesbian couples.
Under family unification provisions in immigration law, American citizens and legal residents can petition for residency for their spouses. There is no numerical limit on permanent residence visas, known as green cards, for spouses of American citizens, and this is one of the main channels for legal immigration to the United States. Same-sex couples, though, cannot petition for partners, and many face the prospect of an immigrant partner’s deportation.
Senator Leahy’s bill would add the term “permanent partner” to sections of current immigration law that refer to married couples, and would provide a legal definition of those terms.
“I just think it’s a matter of fairness,” he said Tuesday in an interview, noting that a number of American allies, including Canada, France and Germany, recognize same-sex couples in immigration law.
The Judiciary Committee is to hear testimony on Wednesday from Shirley Tan, 43, the mother of twin 12-year-old boys who are United States citizens because they were born here. Ms. Tan has raised them with her partner of 20 years, Jay Mercado, who like Ms. Tan is from the Philippines. Although Ms. Mercado became a naturalized American citizen in 1998, she has not been able to gain legal immigration status for Ms. Tan.
Ms. Tan said she came to this country fleeing a cousin who was released from prison in the Philippines after he served 10 years for the murders of her mother and her sister. Ms. Tan said she had been severely injured in the 1979 attack by the cousin.
She applied for political asylum in the United States, she said, but did not receive notice when it was denied years later. She remained here with a provisional legal status until last Jan. 28, when federal immigration agents carrying a deportation order came to the home she shares with Ms. Mercado, 48, in Pacifica, Calif.
Since her arrest, Ms. Tan has been able to remain legally in the country because of a private bill introduced on her behalf by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California.
Ms. Tan said she feared returning to live in the Philippines, in part because of concern that she and Ms. Mercado would face anti-gay discrimination there.
“People are cruel,” she said. “I don’t know if I can expose my boys to narrow-minded people.”
Opponents of the Leahy bill argue that it would foster immigration fraud because it would be difficult for immigration officers to determine whether same-sex couples had an established relationship.
Supporters said the bill would assist about 36,000 same-sex couples nationwide. Rachel B. Tiven, the executive director of Immigration Equality, a group that advocates for gay rights legislation, said the bill had improved chances this year because of recent same-sex marriage victories in Iowa, Maine and Vermont.
Bill Proposes Immigration Rights for Gay Couples
By JULIA PRESTON
Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Democrat from Vermont who is the powerful chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is adding another controversial ingredient to the volatile mix of an immigration debate that President Obama has said he hopes to spur in Congress before the end of the year.
Mr. Leahy has offered a bill that would allow American citizens and legal immigrants to seek residency in the United States for their same-sex partners, just as spouses now petition for foreign-born husbands and wives.
The senator has said the bill should be part of any broad immigration legislation that Congress considers. To highlight his initiative, known as the Uniting American Families Act, Mr. Leahy is holding a hearing on Wednesday to discuss it in the full Judiciary Committee, bypassing the usual subcommittee hearings.
Also this week, immigrant advocacy groups and labor organizations are opening a nationwide campaign to hold President Obama to his recent pledge to initiate a Congressional debate on immigration legislation later this year.
Small-scale rallies took place on Monday in Los Angeles and some 40 other locations, and immigration groups are converging on Washington on Wednesday for three days of strategy meetings.
The Obama administration, juggling an array of huge and pressing issues on the economy and health care reform, has encouraged the mobilization of immigration advocates, especially Latino groups, while avoiding any legislative battles for now on the prickly topic of immigration. President Obama has invited a bipartisan group of lawmakers to the White House next Monday to “launch a policy conversation” about immigration, an administration official said.
The president wants to “identify areas of agreement, and areas where we still have work to do,” said the official, who would only speak on background because the final plans for the meeting were not settled.
The most contentious part of the immigration legislation that the administration supports, which is known as comprehensive immigration reform, is a program to give legal status to more than 11 million illegal immigrants living in the country. But current proposals also include a variety of measures intended, like Senator Leahy’s, to expand or streamline the legal immigration system.
Mr. Leahy’s proposal for same-sex immigration benefits was not included in the immigration legislation that the Bush administration brought forward in 2007, which failed after a firestorm of opposition, mainly from Republican voters.
Groups backing the overhaul this year have cobbled together a wide-ranging but fragile coalition that includes Latino and black groups, Roman Catholic and evangelical Christian churches, farm workers and commercial farmers, and some employer groups. In contrast to 2007, organized labor is united this time around in supporting the overhaul.
The political fault lines opened by Senator Leahy’s same-sex bill quickly became apparent this week. In a letter sent Tuesday, Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City, the chairman of the Catholic bishops’ Committee on Migration, wrote that the Uniting American Families Act would “erode the institution of marriage and family,” by taking a position “that is contrary to the very nature of marriage which pre-dates the Church and the State.”
Bishop Wester addressed his letter to Representative Michael M. Honda, a California Democrat who has said he will introduce an immigration bill containing similar same-sex provisions in the House this week.
J. Kevin Appleby, the immigration policy director for the bishops’ conference, said, “The last thing the national immigration debate needs is another politically divisive issue added to the mix.”
But Senator Leahy said the bill would eliminate discrimination in immigration law against gay and lesbian couples.
Under family unification provisions in immigration law, American citizens and legal residents can petition for residency for their spouses. There is no numerical limit on permanent residence visas, known as green cards, for spouses of American citizens, and this is one of the main channels for legal immigration to the United States. Same-sex couples, though, cannot petition for partners, and many face the prospect of an immigrant partner’s deportation.
Senator Leahy’s bill would add the term “permanent partner” to sections of current immigration law that refer to married couples, and would provide a legal definition of those terms.
“I just think it’s a matter of fairness,” he said Tuesday in an interview, noting that a number of American allies, including Canada, France and Germany, recognize same-sex couples in immigration law.
The Judiciary Committee is to hear testimony on Wednesday from Shirley Tan, 43, the mother of twin 12-year-old boys who are United States citizens because they were born here. Ms. Tan has raised them with her partner of 20 years, Jay Mercado, who like Ms. Tan is from the Philippines. Although Ms. Mercado became a naturalized American citizen in 1998, she has not been able to gain legal immigration status for Ms. Tan.
Ms. Tan said she came to this country fleeing a cousin who was released from prison in the Philippines after he served 10 years for the murders of her mother and her sister. Ms. Tan said she had been severely injured in the 1979 attack by the cousin.
She applied for political asylum in the United States, she said, but did not receive notice when it was denied years later. She remained here with a provisional legal status until last Jan. 28, when federal immigration agents carrying a deportation order came to the home she shares with Ms. Mercado, 48, in Pacifica, Calif.
Since her arrest, Ms. Tan has been able to remain legally in the country because of a private bill introduced on her behalf by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California.
Ms. Tan said she feared returning to live in the Philippines, in part because of concern that she and Ms. Mercado would face anti-gay discrimination there.
“People are cruel,” she said. “I don’t know if I can expose my boys to narrow-minded people.”
Opponents of the Leahy bill argue that it would foster immigration fraud because it would be difficult for immigration officers to determine whether same-sex couples had an established relationship.
Supporters said the bill would assist about 36,000 same-sex couples nationwide. Rachel B. Tiven, the executive director of Immigration Equality, a group that advocates for gay rights legislation, said the bill had improved chances this year because of recent same-sex marriage victories in Iowa, Maine and Vermont.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Gay Marriage Pressure Increases
New York Daily News
June 1, 2009
With the end of the legislative session in sight, advocates for the legalization of same-sex marriage are stepping up their efforts to pressure the Senate to pass Gov. David Paterson's program bill.
The latest effort comes from the New York Civil Liberties Union, which launched a new Web site that features features videos of 12 lesbian and gay couples from around the state telling the story of how they met their respective partners and urging viewers to contact their local lawmakers and ask them to vote "yes."
The couples are from key areas represented by lawmakers who are so far holding out on marriage, including Queens, Long Island, Brooklyn and the Syracuse area. (Steven and Pedro Julio, featured in the video below, are from Queens, where Democratic Sen. George Onorato is one of the "no" votes.
Also today, Sen. Tom Duane, who is carrying Paterson's bill in the Senate, is hosting a press conference in Albany with same-sex couples who will talk about their relationships. Duane's partner, Louis Webre, is in town to attend the event.
The idea behind these efforts, as well as the ad campaign being paid for by the Empire State Pride Agenda, is to put a human "face" on gay marriage in hopes of convincing lawmakers that this is an intensely personal issue and not merely a political hot potato.
Advocates are hoping the marriage bill, which recently passed the Assembly for the second time - and by a wider margin than in 2007 - is on the move in Albany and possibly could come up for a vote either this week (which seems extremely optimistic) or next.
Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith, however, has made it clear he won't bring the bill to the floor until he's sure it has at least the 32 votes it needs to pass, which will likely require convincing some Republicans to vote "yes."
While everyone from Council Speaker Christine Quinn to ESPA Executive Director Alan Van Capelle to the Log Cabin Republicans' new lobbyist, Mike Avella, have been working GOP lawmakers, so far the 32 vote threshold has yet to be crossed.
June 1, 2009
With the end of the legislative session in sight, advocates for the legalization of same-sex marriage are stepping up their efforts to pressure the Senate to pass Gov. David Paterson's program bill.
The latest effort comes from the New York Civil Liberties Union, which launched a new Web site that features features videos of 12 lesbian and gay couples from around the state telling the story of how they met their respective partners and urging viewers to contact their local lawmakers and ask them to vote "yes."
The couples are from key areas represented by lawmakers who are so far holding out on marriage, including Queens, Long Island, Brooklyn and the Syracuse area. (Steven and Pedro Julio, featured in the video below, are from Queens, where Democratic Sen. George Onorato is one of the "no" votes.
Also today, Sen. Tom Duane, who is carrying Paterson's bill in the Senate, is hosting a press conference in Albany with same-sex couples who will talk about their relationships. Duane's partner, Louis Webre, is in town to attend the event.
The idea behind these efforts, as well as the ad campaign being paid for by the Empire State Pride Agenda, is to put a human "face" on gay marriage in hopes of convincing lawmakers that this is an intensely personal issue and not merely a political hot potato.
Advocates are hoping the marriage bill, which recently passed the Assembly for the second time - and by a wider margin than in 2007 - is on the move in Albany and possibly could come up for a vote either this week (which seems extremely optimistic) or next.
Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith, however, has made it clear he won't bring the bill to the floor until he's sure it has at least the 32 votes it needs to pass, which will likely require convincing some Republicans to vote "yes."
While everyone from Council Speaker Christine Quinn to ESPA Executive Director Alan Van Capelle to the Log Cabin Republicans' new lobbyist, Mike Avella, have been working GOP lawmakers, so far the 32 vote threshold has yet to be crossed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
