The Guardian, The pink posse takes on America: Gay is the word in living rooms, churches and political chambers across the States this season.
Paul Harris, writes in The Observer:
"To their critics they are the thin end of a wedge of perverted values. To their defenders they are heroes breaking down prejudice. But to millions of Americans they are simply the Fab Five. Meet Ted, Kyan, Thom, Carson and Jai: the flamboyant stars of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, the hottest show on US television and the surprise hit of summer schedules normally given over to endless repeats."
Newsday, The Family Resort: Fire Island is the closest thing to an all-gay, all- American small town.
Honolulu Advertiser, Marriage amendment support sought.
Cincinnati Enquirer, Gay marriage ban gains steam, House, Senate to hold hearings
Ottawa Citizen, Canada: Cauchon plans pre-emptive strike on gay marriage, Federal government will not accept 'less than equal' treatment for homosexuals
Search here for more LGBT News
Custom Search
August 18, 2003
August 13, 2003
Gay Muslims Work Toward a New Islam, Pension to cover gay partners, Idaho: Two coordinators of the Idaho Falls Annual Heritage Festival resign
1. FORWARD Mubarak Dahir: Gay Muslims Work Toward a New Islam
2. NEWS24.COM (South Africa) Pension to cover gay partners
3. OMAHA WORLD-HERALD Two letters: One thumbs-up, one thumbs-down
4. PROVIDENCE JOURNAL Letter from another Bible reader who likes the
"shameful lusts" part the best
5. RAPID CITY JOURNAL (South Dakota) Weird letter about "gay divorce" and
one about literal interpretation of the Bible
6. HONOLULU ADVERTISER Letter: Homosexual union is a basic human right
7. ASSOCIATED PRESS Idaho: Two coordinators of the Idaho Falls Annual Heritage Festival resigned Wednesday after the mayor requested that the
festival no longer include gay, religious or political booths
8. ABC NEWS (Australia) South Sydney City Council has become the first
local government body in Australia to formally recognise gay and lesbian
relationships
Forward, August 15, 2003
45 E. 33rd St., New York, NY 10016
(Fax: 212-447-6406 ) (E-Mail: editor@forward.com )
( http://www.Forward.com )
http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.08.15/news12.html
Gay Muslims Work Toward a New Islam
Reporter's Notebook
By Mubarak Dahir
The melodic strains of the Muslim call for prayer reverberate off the
walls of the odd-shaped room as a handful of men and women gather side by
side in a row up front. Eventually, the small assembly of faithful bend and
bow in the familiarly graceful motions that constitute the Muslim prayer.
But this is no mosque, and certainly no ordinary gathering of
Muslims.
It is an all-day conference for lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender Muslims and their allies. The Saturday, August 9, event is
sponsored by Al-Fatiha, a national organization of gay Muslims, and is being
held at The New York City Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community
Center on West 13th Street in Greenwich Village.
It is just after 2 p.m. when the afternoon prayer begins. There are
probably 70 or so people squashed against the back wall of the Caplan
Assembly Hall, downing Diet Cokes and turkey or roast beef sandwiches from
Subway. The chatter drops to a dramatic whisper when the prayers begin, but
most people do not leave the room or stop their conversations just because
of the service. It is not a lack of respect, but rather a reminder, I
think, of how deeply ingrained religion is in daily life for those of us who
grew up Muslim. This is why we do not feel the churchlike compulsion for
grave silence in the face of the Almighty.
I do not join in the prayers. Even to say that I am a lapsed Muslim
is stretching the truth. My father did his best to pass on his religion to
my sister and me, driving us half a dozen times a year from where we lived
in small-town Hershey, Pa., to the closest mosque some two and a half hours
away, in Washington, D.C. Like a good son, I memorized the passages from
the Koran in Arabic that I barely understood and robotically waded through
the ritual motions of prayer.
But the Muslim thing was a difficult sell to an Americanized child in
the 1970s. Diversity was not yet the buzzword it has now become, and it was
tough enough having an Arabic name and a dark-skinned father in lily-white
Chocolate Town, USA. I would never really count myself as one of the
followers of the prophet Mohammed.
Over the years, I have forgotten and relearned the gestures and
passages of prayer numerous times, though as an atheist I seldom indulge in
the ritual. Still, I never tire of the sonorous call to prayer or watching
groups of believers move to their faith in elegant unity. And ever since
September 11 - and the subsequent vilification of Muslims in American
society - I find that the Muslim prayer carries a heightened sense of
nostalgia and culture for me.
Those feelings are magnified many times over at this gathering, where
those carrying the dual identity of Muslim and gay congregate to share their
faith in their religion, and in each other.
Particularly in a post-9/11 America, gay and lesbian Muslims can be
torn by both sides of their identities. Many have experienced acute
stereotyping and discrimination here since the terrorist attacks. Sadly,
the community that many of them had always considered a safe haven - the gay
community - is just as fraught with anti-Muslim sentiment as the general
population.
Yet, most mainstream Muslim organizations and mosques remain
unfriendly at best, and outright hostile at worst, to their gay and lesbian
followers.
The net effect has been to draw many gay and lesbian Muslims back to
their roots, to reconnect with their spirituality or their culture.
"I had so many issues with my faith, including ones around my
sexuality, that I had rejected my religious history," said Atif Toor, a
graphic designer. "September 11 definitely changed that. I found myself
defending Islam on a regular basis, where before I'd been a skeptic. But I
found that even as a skeptic of Islam, the religion wasn't the image of
terror and oppression that is the popular perception in the USA. So 9/11
had a profound impact on my relationship with Islam. I was forced to
reconcile parts of my personal past that I'd been ignoring."
But the conference is not merely a therapy session on how to
reconcile sexuality and faith. Most of the people I speak with are not
embroiled in dark personal struggles pitting their sexuality against their
religion. Like gay and lesbian people of all beliefs, the people here have
learned how to use their religion as a source of strength rather than
conflict.
The panels reflect that sensibility. Only one panel deals directly
with bridging sexuality and faith: one that offers an alternative
interpretation of the story of Lot.
The other discussions center around more immediately pressing issues
in the lives of people who are here, such as how to face increased
discrimination since September 11, how to deal with the new and troubling
developments in immigration, fighting sexism within the religion or where
gay and lesbian Muslims fit into the larger picture of an evolving Islam.
The attendees seem to be looking for more than simple affirmation
that they can indeed be gay and Muslim; they already realize that. Instead,
they appear to be working toward a new Islam, part of what is loosely
referred to as the progressive Muslim movement, made up largely of
modernists and feminists.
But even there, it can be an uphill battle. "There's not a lot of us
[who accept homosexuality] on the ground, yet," said Saadia Yacoob, a
heterosexual ally of Al-Fatiha and a founding member of the Progressive
Muslims Network. "In scholarship and online, yes, but people able to stand
up in their local communities or at their local mosques, no."
The problem among progressives, she said, is less of outright
homophobia than of fear of being alienated for openly supporting something
that is widely unpopular in the traditional cultures from which most Muslims
hail.
But, she notes, there has been significant advancement in that arena.
In its mission statement, the Progressive Muslims Network specifically names
homophobia - along with such other social ills as sexism, racism and
classism - as an enemy. Gay and lesbian Muslims are invited to speak at
progressive religious conferences, and a newly published book, "Progressive
Muslims," includes a chapter on homosexuality.
"We're definitely moving forward," said an optimistic Yacoob.
Change will probably be slow and hard, as it always is. But watching
the small group of men and women worshipping together, hoping together, in
the small corner of the community center this day I, too, am filled with a
new kind of faith - if not in the religion itself, then in the foot-soldiers
here who are determined to reinspire it.
News24.com (South Africa), August 13, 2003
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Aids_Focus/0,,2-7-659_1401790,00.h
tml
Pension to cover gay partners
Alet Rademeyer
Pretoria - Radical changes to the public servants' pension fund,
which will bring relief to government employees affected by the HIV/Aids
pandemic in future, were published in the government gazette this week.
Anton Louwrens, chief executive of the Public Servants Association
(PSA), said the changes would benefit public servants.
One of the most important amendments is the change to the definition
of a spouse. In the past, spouse referred to a legally married man or
woman.
The amendment now includes a "life partner" (also same sex partners)
and more than one partner in common law marriages.
Louwrens said an employee would now be able to register more than one
life partner with the fund who will be able to lay a claim to the pension
when the employee dies.
Provision has also been made for a "child pension". This means that
dependent children will also be able to claim part of the pension benefits
when an employee without a spouse dies.
One child can get 20% of the pension benefit, two can claim 30% and
three or more children 40%.
In future, a funeral benefit of R7 500 will be paid to the
next-of-kin of an employee. The same amount will be paid out if the
employee's life partner dies and R3 000 will be paid out when an employee's
child dies.
Older pensioners will also be advantaged by the changes. The
contribution they get annually will now be linked to the consumer price
index.
Members will now also have the option to ensure that their spouses
are better off after their death. In the past, a spouse could only claim
50% of the pension benefit. This will increase to 75% if the employee
agrees to a smaller monthly pension or gratification.
Louwrens said many members were not satisfied with the existing
spouse pension of 50% and that the PSA was still looking into this matter.
He said that the pension fund was "healthy" and that it could meet
all its responsibilities towards its members.
Omaha World Herald, August 13, 2003
World Herald Square, Omaha, NE, 68102
(Fax: 402-345-4547 ) (E-Mail: pulse@owh.com )
( http://www.omaha.com )
Letter: Article was informative
I wanted to thank The World-Herald for the wonderful article on the
front page of Sunday's paper, "Gay parents in the Midlands: Families bound
by love, limited by law."
This is a wonderful article that helps to demonstrate how the
argument about gay marriage affects more than just the two individuals who
want to marry. This story helps to give a face to the many families who are
forced to live a precarious existence where the future can be uncertain and
scary.
I pray for the sake of all the gay families today and for the sake of
my and my partner's future children that this will change. The struggle for
gay marriage is not and has never been a drive to cheapen the institution of
marriage, but to protect the future for our families.
- S.E. Carpenter, Omaha
Letter: Her view was absurd
Froma Harrop ended her Aug. 7 attack on heterosexual marriages with
the statement that "focusing on gay marriage as a knife pointed at the
social fabric seems an exercise in absurdity."
What seems more absurd to me is that so many people refuse to see the
wrong of homosexuality.
- Alton L. Dawson, Omaha
Providence Journal, August 13, 2003
75 Fountain St., Providence, RI, 02902
(Fax: 401-277-7346 ) (E-Mail: letters@projo.com )
( http://www.projo.com )
Letter: Homosexuality in the eyes of God
The Episcopal Church chose to spit in the face of God with the
confirmation of a homosexual bishop. As far as God is concerned, this is a
sin. The elders of the church are now approving sinful behavior.
Condemnations of the acts of homosexuality are written throughout the Bible,
but the scripture in Romans 1:21-27 is pretty clear. It reads:
"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor
gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish
hearts were darkened. Although they claim to be wise they became fools, and
exchanged the image of the immortal God for images that looked like mortal
men and birds and animals and reptiles.
"Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts
to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They
exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the created
thing rather than the creator - who is forever praised. Amen.
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their
women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the
men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust
one for another. Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in
themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
God calls it perversion. What do you call it?
- James F. Dunn, Newport
Rapid City Journal, August 13, 2003
Box 450, Rapid City, SD, 57709
(Fax: 605-394-8463 ) (E-Mail: journal@rapidnet.com )
Letter: Gay divorce
Much has recently been written about gays and homosexual marriage.
Since Doug Free's letter (July 29) about the shameful Gay Pride parade,
there has been the election of a gay clergyman into higher ranks of his
church where he can influence the whole body.
One lesson in that sad story is to remove from the ministry any
clergyman who lives outside the loving guidelines that God has laid down for
His people and re-instruct his parish in the truths he abandoned.
In recent discussions there appears an assumption that homosexual
marriages would be stable. Why is no one talking about "gay divorce"? What
happens when men become ashamed of their behavior and seek to leave such
relationships, or what happens to men abandoned by male companions?
Believe me, police officers are trained to inspect homicide scenes
for telltale evidence of murder between homosexuals. The suicide rate among
homosexuals is higher than the general population.
There is a way out: believe in Jesus Christ. Believe in His love for
you and His death on the cross, and don't let anyone dissuade you with the
phobia that society has adopted against Jesus Christ.
- David V. Krueger, Rapid City
Letter: Sounds silly today
You better believe I have some questions, Don Kopp (Aug. 7 letter).
Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female,
provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. I wasn't aware I
could own Canadians, but it's in the Bible, so it must be true, right?
I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obliged to kill him
myself?
I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig
makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
A friend would like to sell his daughter into slavery, as sanctioned
in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price
for her?
Another friend feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree.
Can you help? You see, Don, if we take everything the "Greatest Book
Ever Written" says literally in this day and age, we sound a little silly,
huh?
- Jason Knox, Rapid City
Honolulu Advertiser, August 13, 2003
P.O. Box 3110, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813
(Fax: 808-525-8037) (E-Mail: letters@honoluluadvertiser.com )
( http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com )
Letter: Homosexual union is a basic human right
Adults have inherent human rights to voluntarily assume binding
obligations for other persons. Adoption is an example. Guardianship is
another. And properly, as basic human rights, the civil law recognizes
them.
Same-sex couples possess the same human rights to assume binding
reciprocal obligations for each other. Of course, all religions are free to
adopt their own policies regarding marriage and same-sex relationships. But
the law must distinguish between religious prerogatives and human rights.
Religions may govern religious marriage. Anyone may voice their
opinions on the morality and wisdom of voluntary same-sex relations between
adults. But the U.S. Supreme Court has settled the question of whether
homosexuality is against the law of the land. Unlike polygamy and incest,
homosexuality is not a crime.
So now the time has come for the law to treat same-sex unions in
every instance as completely interchangeable with the legal institution of
marriage. Let marriage remain only between a man and a woman, but it should
not be the only legal institution that recognizes such a basic civil right.
- Lunsford Dole Phillips, Kailua
Associated Press, August 13, 2003
http://www.trib.com/AP/wire_detail.php?wire_num=132527
Festival leaders resign after mayor says no to gay groups
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) - Two coordinators of the Idaho Falls Annual
Heritage Festival resigned Wednesday after the mayor requested that the
festival no longer include gay, religious or political booths.
In a letter to the mayor, Festival Chairman Glenn Rodgers and
Principal Coordinator LaDonna Foster said they could not serve in the
volunteer positions as long as the mayor tried to restrict participation.
''From our perspective, your decision to discriminate is
reprehensible, un-American, and totally unacceptable,'' Rodgers and Foster
wrote.
Mayor Linda Milam objected to participation by the Parents, Families,
and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, the Southeast Idaho AIDS Coalition and the
Gays and Lesbians Alliance.
But Milam said she was not discriminating, only trying to return the
festival to its original focus on ethnic heritage. She says she's
''absolutely not'' [?]
The Mayor's Cultural Awareness and Human Relations Committee took
over sponsorship of the 13-year-old festival several years ago when
participation dropped so low that it was nearly canceled, Milam said.
It was still called the ''Ethnic Heritage Festival,'' and the mayor's
committee was created to focus on ethnic and racial issues, Milam said.
Asked if she opposes gays and lesbians, Milam said, ''No, absolutely not.
I'm not against anybody.''
More recently the festival focus expanded, and the name was shortened
to the ''Heritage Festival.''
But, Milam said, ''The mayor's committee has taken a very careful
stance to not become involved in religious issues. Last year there was
[sic] complaints because political groups set up booths and I said, 'Let's
not have the good that this festival can do get lost in trying to be so
broad that it loses its original intent.'''
While the festival was supposed to be restricted to ethnic groups
this year, gay and lesbian advocacy groups set up a booth as did religious
groups including the Buddhists, Baha'is and Holy Rosary Catholic Church.
''The Mayor's Committee was set up to deal with some racial and
ethnic issues that were in this community. That is its role,'' Milam said.
''Its role is not to solve all the problems in the world.''
John Schroeder, who volunteered at the booth sponsored by the AIDS
Coalition and two gay and lesbian groups, said his booth fit the heritage
theme.
''We tailored the message to gay and lesbian heritage in Idaho. We
had wildflower seeds and pots and anyone who wanted could plant the seeds.
We explained that the wildflowers would be many different colors, and that
diversity makes a beautiful bouquet,'' Schroeder said.
He called Milam's decision ''a covert way of imposing her bigotry on
the community and the festival.''
Milam said her request was never official city policy. But in the
future, she said, other community groups would have to take over the Mayor's
Committee sponsorship or the festival would be limited to ethnic groups
only.
Rodgers said that if the event were restricted to ethnic groups,
two-thirds of the vendors would be lost - including the Mayor's booth.
Milam said that would be OK.
''Sometimes things go away. That's not a bad thing,'' the mayor
said. ''If the Mayor's Committee choses [sic] to do an ethnic festival then
they can go back to a small event.''
ABC News (Australia), August 14, 2003
http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/nsw/metnsw-14aug2003-3.htm
Sydney council first to recognise gay couples
The South Sydney City Council has become the first local government
body in Australia to formally recognise gay and lesbian relationships.
The council, during a heated meeting last night, voted in favour of
creating a partnerships register, allowing couples unable to marry under
Australian law to formally register their relationship.
A similar register has been implemented by the Greater London
Authority in Britain
Gay rights campaigner Rodney Croome says the decision signals a
change in attitude towards gay rights.
"I've got no doubt that we'll see these legislation systems
implemented now in a whole range of local governments around Australia," he
said.
"A similar trend occurred in other western countries where there were
single cities [who] took the initiative and then other cities followed."
2. NEWS24.COM (South Africa) Pension to cover gay partners
3. OMAHA WORLD-HERALD Two letters: One thumbs-up, one thumbs-down
4. PROVIDENCE JOURNAL Letter from another Bible reader who likes the
"shameful lusts" part the best
5. RAPID CITY JOURNAL (South Dakota) Weird letter about "gay divorce" and
one about literal interpretation of the Bible
6. HONOLULU ADVERTISER Letter: Homosexual union is a basic human right
7. ASSOCIATED PRESS Idaho: Two coordinators of the Idaho Falls Annual Heritage Festival resigned Wednesday after the mayor requested that the
festival no longer include gay, religious or political booths
8. ABC NEWS (Australia) South Sydney City Council has become the first
local government body in Australia to formally recognise gay and lesbian
relationships
Forward, August 15, 2003
45 E. 33rd St., New York, NY 10016
(Fax: 212-447-6406 ) (E-Mail: editor@forward.com )
( http://www.Forward.com )
http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.08.15/news12.html
Gay Muslims Work Toward a New Islam
Reporter's Notebook
By Mubarak Dahir
The melodic strains of the Muslim call for prayer reverberate off the
walls of the odd-shaped room as a handful of men and women gather side by
side in a row up front. Eventually, the small assembly of faithful bend and
bow in the familiarly graceful motions that constitute the Muslim prayer.
But this is no mosque, and certainly no ordinary gathering of
Muslims.
It is an all-day conference for lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender Muslims and their allies. The Saturday, August 9, event is
sponsored by Al-Fatiha, a national organization of gay Muslims, and is being
held at The New York City Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community
Center on West 13th Street in Greenwich Village.
It is just after 2 p.m. when the afternoon prayer begins. There are
probably 70 or so people squashed against the back wall of the Caplan
Assembly Hall, downing Diet Cokes and turkey or roast beef sandwiches from
Subway. The chatter drops to a dramatic whisper when the prayers begin, but
most people do not leave the room or stop their conversations just because
of the service. It is not a lack of respect, but rather a reminder, I
think, of how deeply ingrained religion is in daily life for those of us who
grew up Muslim. This is why we do not feel the churchlike compulsion for
grave silence in the face of the Almighty.
I do not join in the prayers. Even to say that I am a lapsed Muslim
is stretching the truth. My father did his best to pass on his religion to
my sister and me, driving us half a dozen times a year from where we lived
in small-town Hershey, Pa., to the closest mosque some two and a half hours
away, in Washington, D.C. Like a good son, I memorized the passages from
the Koran in Arabic that I barely understood and robotically waded through
the ritual motions of prayer.
But the Muslim thing was a difficult sell to an Americanized child in
the 1970s. Diversity was not yet the buzzword it has now become, and it was
tough enough having an Arabic name and a dark-skinned father in lily-white
Chocolate Town, USA. I would never really count myself as one of the
followers of the prophet Mohammed.
Over the years, I have forgotten and relearned the gestures and
passages of prayer numerous times, though as an atheist I seldom indulge in
the ritual. Still, I never tire of the sonorous call to prayer or watching
groups of believers move to their faith in elegant unity. And ever since
September 11 - and the subsequent vilification of Muslims in American
society - I find that the Muslim prayer carries a heightened sense of
nostalgia and culture for me.
Those feelings are magnified many times over at this gathering, where
those carrying the dual identity of Muslim and gay congregate to share their
faith in their religion, and in each other.
Particularly in a post-9/11 America, gay and lesbian Muslims can be
torn by both sides of their identities. Many have experienced acute
stereotyping and discrimination here since the terrorist attacks. Sadly,
the community that many of them had always considered a safe haven - the gay
community - is just as fraught with anti-Muslim sentiment as the general
population.
Yet, most mainstream Muslim organizations and mosques remain
unfriendly at best, and outright hostile at worst, to their gay and lesbian
followers.
The net effect has been to draw many gay and lesbian Muslims back to
their roots, to reconnect with their spirituality or their culture.
"I had so many issues with my faith, including ones around my
sexuality, that I had rejected my religious history," said Atif Toor, a
graphic designer. "September 11 definitely changed that. I found myself
defending Islam on a regular basis, where before I'd been a skeptic. But I
found that even as a skeptic of Islam, the religion wasn't the image of
terror and oppression that is the popular perception in the USA. So 9/11
had a profound impact on my relationship with Islam. I was forced to
reconcile parts of my personal past that I'd been ignoring."
But the conference is not merely a therapy session on how to
reconcile sexuality and faith. Most of the people I speak with are not
embroiled in dark personal struggles pitting their sexuality against their
religion. Like gay and lesbian people of all beliefs, the people here have
learned how to use their religion as a source of strength rather than
conflict.
The panels reflect that sensibility. Only one panel deals directly
with bridging sexuality and faith: one that offers an alternative
interpretation of the story of Lot.
The other discussions center around more immediately pressing issues
in the lives of people who are here, such as how to face increased
discrimination since September 11, how to deal with the new and troubling
developments in immigration, fighting sexism within the religion or where
gay and lesbian Muslims fit into the larger picture of an evolving Islam.
The attendees seem to be looking for more than simple affirmation
that they can indeed be gay and Muslim; they already realize that. Instead,
they appear to be working toward a new Islam, part of what is loosely
referred to as the progressive Muslim movement, made up largely of
modernists and feminists.
But even there, it can be an uphill battle. "There's not a lot of us
[who accept homosexuality] on the ground, yet," said Saadia Yacoob, a
heterosexual ally of Al-Fatiha and a founding member of the Progressive
Muslims Network. "In scholarship and online, yes, but people able to stand
up in their local communities or at their local mosques, no."
The problem among progressives, she said, is less of outright
homophobia than of fear of being alienated for openly supporting something
that is widely unpopular in the traditional cultures from which most Muslims
hail.
But, she notes, there has been significant advancement in that arena.
In its mission statement, the Progressive Muslims Network specifically names
homophobia - along with such other social ills as sexism, racism and
classism - as an enemy. Gay and lesbian Muslims are invited to speak at
progressive religious conferences, and a newly published book, "Progressive
Muslims," includes a chapter on homosexuality.
"We're definitely moving forward," said an optimistic Yacoob.
Change will probably be slow and hard, as it always is. But watching
the small group of men and women worshipping together, hoping together, in
the small corner of the community center this day I, too, am filled with a
new kind of faith - if not in the religion itself, then in the foot-soldiers
here who are determined to reinspire it.
News24.com (South Africa), August 13, 2003
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Aids_Focus/0,,2-7-659_1401790,00.h
tml
Pension to cover gay partners
Alet Rademeyer
Pretoria - Radical changes to the public servants' pension fund,
which will bring relief to government employees affected by the HIV/Aids
pandemic in future, were published in the government gazette this week.
Anton Louwrens, chief executive of the Public Servants Association
(PSA), said the changes would benefit public servants.
One of the most important amendments is the change to the definition
of a spouse. In the past, spouse referred to a legally married man or
woman.
The amendment now includes a "life partner" (also same sex partners)
and more than one partner in common law marriages.
Louwrens said an employee would now be able to register more than one
life partner with the fund who will be able to lay a claim to the pension
when the employee dies.
Provision has also been made for a "child pension". This means that
dependent children will also be able to claim part of the pension benefits
when an employee without a spouse dies.
One child can get 20% of the pension benefit, two can claim 30% and
three or more children 40%.
In future, a funeral benefit of R7 500 will be paid to the
next-of-kin of an employee. The same amount will be paid out if the
employee's life partner dies and R3 000 will be paid out when an employee's
child dies.
Older pensioners will also be advantaged by the changes. The
contribution they get annually will now be linked to the consumer price
index.
Members will now also have the option to ensure that their spouses
are better off after their death. In the past, a spouse could only claim
50% of the pension benefit. This will increase to 75% if the employee
agrees to a smaller monthly pension or gratification.
Louwrens said many members were not satisfied with the existing
spouse pension of 50% and that the PSA was still looking into this matter.
He said that the pension fund was "healthy" and that it could meet
all its responsibilities towards its members.
Omaha World Herald, August 13, 2003
World Herald Square, Omaha, NE, 68102
(Fax: 402-345-4547 ) (E-Mail: pulse@owh.com )
( http://www.omaha.com )
Letter: Article was informative
I wanted to thank The World-Herald for the wonderful article on the
front page of Sunday's paper, "Gay parents in the Midlands: Families bound
by love, limited by law."
This is a wonderful article that helps to demonstrate how the
argument about gay marriage affects more than just the two individuals who
want to marry. This story helps to give a face to the many families who are
forced to live a precarious existence where the future can be uncertain and
scary.
I pray for the sake of all the gay families today and for the sake of
my and my partner's future children that this will change. The struggle for
gay marriage is not and has never been a drive to cheapen the institution of
marriage, but to protect the future for our families.
- S.E. Carpenter, Omaha
Letter: Her view was absurd
Froma Harrop ended her Aug. 7 attack on heterosexual marriages with
the statement that "focusing on gay marriage as a knife pointed at the
social fabric seems an exercise in absurdity."
What seems more absurd to me is that so many people refuse to see the
wrong of homosexuality.
- Alton L. Dawson, Omaha
Providence Journal, August 13, 2003
75 Fountain St., Providence, RI, 02902
(Fax: 401-277-7346 ) (E-Mail: letters@projo.com )
( http://www.projo.com )
Letter: Homosexuality in the eyes of God
The Episcopal Church chose to spit in the face of God with the
confirmation of a homosexual bishop. As far as God is concerned, this is a
sin. The elders of the church are now approving sinful behavior.
Condemnations of the acts of homosexuality are written throughout the Bible,
but the scripture in Romans 1:21-27 is pretty clear. It reads:
"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor
gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish
hearts were darkened. Although they claim to be wise they became fools, and
exchanged the image of the immortal God for images that looked like mortal
men and birds and animals and reptiles.
"Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts
to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They
exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the created
thing rather than the creator - who is forever praised. Amen.
"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their
women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the
men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust
one for another. Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in
themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
God calls it perversion. What do you call it?
- James F. Dunn, Newport
Rapid City Journal, August 13, 2003
Box 450, Rapid City, SD, 57709
(Fax: 605-394-8463 ) (E-Mail: journal@rapidnet.com )
Letter: Gay divorce
Much has recently been written about gays and homosexual marriage.
Since Doug Free's letter (July 29) about the shameful Gay Pride parade,
there has been the election of a gay clergyman into higher ranks of his
church where he can influence the whole body.
One lesson in that sad story is to remove from the ministry any
clergyman who lives outside the loving guidelines that God has laid down for
His people and re-instruct his parish in the truths he abandoned.
In recent discussions there appears an assumption that homosexual
marriages would be stable. Why is no one talking about "gay divorce"? What
happens when men become ashamed of their behavior and seek to leave such
relationships, or what happens to men abandoned by male companions?
Believe me, police officers are trained to inspect homicide scenes
for telltale evidence of murder between homosexuals. The suicide rate among
homosexuals is higher than the general population.
There is a way out: believe in Jesus Christ. Believe in His love for
you and His death on the cross, and don't let anyone dissuade you with the
phobia that society has adopted against Jesus Christ.
- David V. Krueger, Rapid City
Letter: Sounds silly today
You better believe I have some questions, Don Kopp (Aug. 7 letter).
Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female,
provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. I wasn't aware I
could own Canadians, but it's in the Bible, so it must be true, right?
I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obliged to kill him
myself?
I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig
makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
A friend would like to sell his daughter into slavery, as sanctioned
in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price
for her?
Another friend feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree.
Can you help? You see, Don, if we take everything the "Greatest Book
Ever Written" says literally in this day and age, we sound a little silly,
huh?
- Jason Knox, Rapid City
Honolulu Advertiser, August 13, 2003
P.O. Box 3110, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813
(Fax: 808-525-8037) (E-Mail: letters@honoluluadvertiser.com )
( http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com )
Letter: Homosexual union is a basic human right
Adults have inherent human rights to voluntarily assume binding
obligations for other persons. Adoption is an example. Guardianship is
another. And properly, as basic human rights, the civil law recognizes
them.
Same-sex couples possess the same human rights to assume binding
reciprocal obligations for each other. Of course, all religions are free to
adopt their own policies regarding marriage and same-sex relationships. But
the law must distinguish between religious prerogatives and human rights.
Religions may govern religious marriage. Anyone may voice their
opinions on the morality and wisdom of voluntary same-sex relations between
adults. But the U.S. Supreme Court has settled the question of whether
homosexuality is against the law of the land. Unlike polygamy and incest,
homosexuality is not a crime.
So now the time has come for the law to treat same-sex unions in
every instance as completely interchangeable with the legal institution of
marriage. Let marriage remain only between a man and a woman, but it should
not be the only legal institution that recognizes such a basic civil right.
- Lunsford Dole Phillips, Kailua
Associated Press, August 13, 2003
http://www.trib.com/AP/wire_detail.php?wire_num=132527
Festival leaders resign after mayor says no to gay groups
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) - Two coordinators of the Idaho Falls Annual
Heritage Festival resigned Wednesday after the mayor requested that the
festival no longer include gay, religious or political booths.
In a letter to the mayor, Festival Chairman Glenn Rodgers and
Principal Coordinator LaDonna Foster said they could not serve in the
volunteer positions as long as the mayor tried to restrict participation.
''From our perspective, your decision to discriminate is
reprehensible, un-American, and totally unacceptable,'' Rodgers and Foster
wrote.
Mayor Linda Milam objected to participation by the Parents, Families,
and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, the Southeast Idaho AIDS Coalition and the
Gays and Lesbians Alliance.
But Milam said she was not discriminating, only trying to return the
festival to its original focus on ethnic heritage. She says she's
''absolutely not'' [?]
The Mayor's Cultural Awareness and Human Relations Committee took
over sponsorship of the 13-year-old festival several years ago when
participation dropped so low that it was nearly canceled, Milam said.
It was still called the ''Ethnic Heritage Festival,'' and the mayor's
committee was created to focus on ethnic and racial issues, Milam said.
Asked if she opposes gays and lesbians, Milam said, ''No, absolutely not.
I'm not against anybody.''
More recently the festival focus expanded, and the name was shortened
to the ''Heritage Festival.''
But, Milam said, ''The mayor's committee has taken a very careful
stance to not become involved in religious issues. Last year there was
[sic] complaints because political groups set up booths and I said, 'Let's
not have the good that this festival can do get lost in trying to be so
broad that it loses its original intent.'''
While the festival was supposed to be restricted to ethnic groups
this year, gay and lesbian advocacy groups set up a booth as did religious
groups including the Buddhists, Baha'is and Holy Rosary Catholic Church.
''The Mayor's Committee was set up to deal with some racial and
ethnic issues that were in this community. That is its role,'' Milam said.
''Its role is not to solve all the problems in the world.''
John Schroeder, who volunteered at the booth sponsored by the AIDS
Coalition and two gay and lesbian groups, said his booth fit the heritage
theme.
''We tailored the message to gay and lesbian heritage in Idaho. We
had wildflower seeds and pots and anyone who wanted could plant the seeds.
We explained that the wildflowers would be many different colors, and that
diversity makes a beautiful bouquet,'' Schroeder said.
He called Milam's decision ''a covert way of imposing her bigotry on
the community and the festival.''
Milam said her request was never official city policy. But in the
future, she said, other community groups would have to take over the Mayor's
Committee sponsorship or the festival would be limited to ethnic groups
only.
Rodgers said that if the event were restricted to ethnic groups,
two-thirds of the vendors would be lost - including the Mayor's booth.
Milam said that would be OK.
''Sometimes things go away. That's not a bad thing,'' the mayor
said. ''If the Mayor's Committee choses [sic] to do an ethnic festival then
they can go back to a small event.''
ABC News (Australia), August 14, 2003
http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/nsw/metnsw-14aug2003-3.htm
Sydney council first to recognise gay couples
The South Sydney City Council has become the first local government
body in Australia to formally recognise gay and lesbian relationships.
The council, during a heated meeting last night, voted in favour of
creating a partnerships register, allowing couples unable to marry under
Australian law to formally register their relationship.
A similar register has been implemented by the Greater London
Authority in Britain
Gay rights campaigner Rodney Croome says the decision signals a
change in attitude towards gay rights.
"I've got no doubt that we'll see these legislation systems
implemented now in a whole range of local governments around Australia," he
said.
"A similar trend occurred in other western countries where there were
single cities [who] took the initiative and then other cities followed."
A new kind of family, Gay Uzbek Journalist Convicted of Sodomy
1. THE GUARDIAN (London) A new kind of family: Tony and Barrie
Drewitt-Barlow caused a furore when they became the first openly gay
surrogate parents. But the experience hasn't put them off trying it again
2. WASHINGTON TIMES Column: The marriage amendment (Of course, it's in
support.)
3. USA TODAY Forget backlash: We're just another American family
4. ASSOCIATED PRESS Gay Uzbek Journalist Convicted of Sodomy
The Guardian, August 13, 2003
119 Farringdon Rd., London EC1 3ER England
(Fax: +44/171/837-2114 ) (E-Mail: letters@guardian.co.uk )
( http://www.guardian.co.uk )
http://www.guardian.co.uk/parents/story/0,3605,1017338,00.html
A new kind of family
Tony and Barrie Drewitt-Barlow caused a furore when they became the first
openly gay surrogate parents. But, as they tell Joseph Galliano, the
experience hasn't put them off trying it again
"We are pregnant," announces Barrie, a proud father-to-be, who looks
with uncertainty at his partner of 15 years. "The baby is due on August
19." They had agreed to keep the baby's name secret for the time being but,
like most expectant fathers, he can barely contain himself. Tony smiles
gently and nods at him. "We are going to call him Orlando," Barrie squeals.
But these are no ordinary parents; these are the Drewitt-Barlows - and there
is not a bump or stretchmark between them.
Almost four years ago, Tony and Barrie Drewitt-Barlow made history.
They were the nation's first openly gay surrogate baby parents, and the
first men to be jointly listed on a birth certificate, after they won a
legal battle in the US, where the children were born. Between them the
couple fertilised 24 eggs that had been harvested from egg donor Tracie
Matthews, and two embryos were carried to term by the birth mother, Rosalind
Bellamy: a sexless ménage à quatre that resulted in the births of twins
Aspen and Saffron Drewitt-Barlow.
For all the costly procedures, press intrusion, criticism, battles
with the Home Office and even kidnap threats, they enjoyed parenthood enough
the first time round to try again. This time they have used eggs from the
original harvesting, but Orlando will have a different birth mother because
Bellamy talked to the tabloids.
Both being men, the odds were stacked against the Drewitt-Barlows
becoming parents together. They explored the adoption route, which was
barred to them because they were a gay couple. But rather than crush their
will, rejection spurred them forwards. "When I was told I wasn't fit to
adopt, the determination it gave me to have kids... " says Barrie, his voice
trailing away in anger.
They had important factors on their side: dogged determination,
advances in reproductive technology and, perhaps most importantly, money.
The couple spent around £200,000 having the twins. They sold their
dermatological product-testing business in 1998 for £4m. Tony juts his chin
forward and says, "Barrie and I don't pipe-dream. If we want something and
there's a way to get it, we will." And what they wanted, more than
anything, was to be joint parents.
Barrie says that he felt cheated that he couldn't have children: "I
knew that I'd be a good father and later I knew that Tony, as my partner,
would make a great dad. I wanted to have my children with Tony."
They met in 1988 on a Manchester garage forecourt, a meeting that
marked new beginnings for both men: "My life up to then had been
shoplifting in Manchester and doing a shitty job that I really hated," says
Barrie. Tony, who was only two weeks away from his wedding - to a woman -
had never slept with a man. Two weeks later he was on his honeymoon - but
with Barrie.
At the time of the twins' birth, the Drewitt-Barlows were a media
sensation. There was a documentary, endless column inches and castigating
editorials. They and their new twins were involved in high-speed car chases
with photographers, and doorstepped for interviews. They had helicopters
buzzing over their property to obtain photographs and Tony was once even
pounced on by Vanessa Feltz while he was having a business lunch.
Barrie and Tony still seem bemused by the attention, though not
enough to have shied away from it entirely: they talk of six-figure-sum
newspaper deals (not, it must be stressed, this one) and selling the first
pictures of Orlando. "Why on earth would anyone be interested in us having
a baby?" Tony says. "The attention at the beginning was amazing - what we
were doing wasn't unusual to our friends and family, it was a normal thing,
just Barrie and I having kids, nothing more that that. The shock for us was
that there was interest at all."
But, as one reporter put it to Tony: "Children are always an issue,
surrogacy is a thorny ethical debate, you're gay, you've got some cash - put
it all together and it's a great package." They were accused of ordering
designer babies over the internet, playing God, playing Frankenstein, and
both setting back the cause of and using babies as a pawn in the fight for
gay emancipation. However, says Barrie, "We didn't start our family as a
crusade for gay rights - it's of absolutely no interest to us at all."
Because of the media attention, they receive hundreds of letters a
year, many supportive, some threatening. One note asked: "If you paid
£200,000 for these kids, how much would you pay to get them back?" They
felt exposed where they were living in Essex, so they turned their house
into a fortress. Barrie says: "It was ridiculous - it was a quaint old
place, but we built a great brick wall around it and had security cameras
everywhere."
"All you want to do is protect your family," laughs Tony grimly.
"It's a macho ego thing."
But the home security modifications were not enough, and soon they
moved back to Manchester and their Canal Street penthouse. "It was great
for me and Tony," says Barrie. "We could hear music from the bars all night
and it was the safest we had felt since we returned from California, but it
wasn't the right environment for the children, and it's too easy to be
pulled into the gay ghetto."
They have, however, had their gay critics. "Why must this twee
dishonesty [being named as parents one and two on the twins' birth
certificates] be allowed to taint their parenthood from the start?" asked
Harry Coen, the former vice-chairman of the Campaign for Homosexual
Equality.
Tony maintains that they have not lied to Aspen and Saffron: "The
children know where they came from," he says. "At three years old they can
tell you the whole story - nothing has been kept from them. They know that
Daddy (Barrie) fertilised the female embryo and Dad (Tony) fertilised the
male embryo. There won't be some great revelation when they are 16. They
know that Tracie is their biological mother; there are photos of her all
over the place. Honesty was the only way." Being named on the birth
certificates affords both men the status of legal guardian to the children,
who are American citizens, outside Britain.
Security has remained an issue for them, and after they moved from
Canal Street to the farmhouse they currently live in near Macclesfield, they
were delighted to place Aspen and Saffron into the same school as Brooklyn
Beckham. It means that security is tight. Like the Beckhams, they are
shortly to move their permanent residence to Spain. They want some privacy
and, since retiring, are bored: "The only thing keeping us here is the
school term. We're not doing anything sat here in Cheshire, and we could be
sat out in the sun," huffs Barrie.
The children will be going to a Spanish school, but at their current
school, their origin and the family's dual-father status has rarely been
raised: "The gay part doesn't count in the Cheshire social set," says Tony.
"Money counts more than anything. We don't talk about relationships to the
other parents, just about holidays and what the kids are up to."
Even though the issue of the children's origins may have been skirted
round by other parents, there is an awareness of it. The children recently
went on their first school trip, and afterwards the teacher took Tony to one
side and told him how protective and affectionate the other mothers had been
towards the twins. "I see that all the time: people going over the top
wanting to help, thinking they have to make up for there being no mum
around," says Tony.
They recognise that their children will stand out because of the
unusual circumstances of their birth, and that this may lead to problems.
"There will be incidents and we'd be fools to pretend otherwise, but you
face it," says Tony. "Every child is different or feels that they are
different. I felt different in my teens because I was gay and hiding it,
but you deal with it."
They may stand out now, yet, Tony says, "We are a new kind of family
but in 10 years' time, we won't be." Procedures become cheaper and society
gets used to ideas. Recently, Tony was watching a chat show about gay dads
and IVF. One viewer phoned the show to say that he thought it was selfish
for gay men to use these technologies because their children might be
bullied at school, that it might be acceptable in the future but not now.
"My blood was boiling," says Tony. "We go through all this shit so that he
can do what he wants in 10 years' time. You have to break the rules
sometimes."
The Drewitt-Barlows are pregnant with contradictions: part social
experiment, part frontiersmen, and part future-family, but in so many ways a
deeply traditional unit. Says Tony: "The best thing is when the kids throw
their arms around you and say, 'Dad, I really love you,' and they give you a
big kiss. It's the most amazing, indescribable thing."
Washington Times, August 13, 2003
3600 New York Avenue NE, Washington, DC, 20002
(Fax: 202-269-3419 ) (E-Mail: letters@washingtontimes.com )
( http://www.washtimes.com/ )
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030812-100636-4016r.htm
The marriage amendment
By L. Lynn Hogue
Marriage has traditionally been a state matter under our federal
system, but states are now under focused pressure from special interests
that seek legitimacy for "homosexual marriage," which a clear majority of
Americans oppose.
So far, only a few states have been confronted with this issue, but
the impetus, as evidenced by the controversy that recently roiled the
Episcopal Church, is clearly there. Some states, like Vermont,
Massachusetts and Hawaii, have toyed with the idea of same-sex marriage
either in their courts or their legislature, and other states may in the
future. So-called civil unions, which provide equal benefits without
conferring the status of "marriage," are already in place in Vermont.
The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision guaranteeing homosexuals equal
treatment regarding sexual practices gives no special claim to marriage
rights. After all, many who have equal sexual autonomy are disqualified
from marriage because of, for example, close kinship, youth or the fact that
they are already married - despite the fact that marriage is a fundamental
interest under the Constitution. The question is, how can the American
majority protect against the special status sought by same-sex marriage
advocates?
The answer is clear - a federal constitutional amendment.
Americans use written constitutions to hamstring the government and
permanently fence off matters about which it can't be trusted. For example,
our forebears judged governments incompetent to protect such rights as free
speech or fair trials, so the federal and state constitutions take them off
the table. States couldn't be trusted to free slaves or confer citizenship
on African Americans, so it went into the Constitution. Some matters are to
remain forever beyond government's reach.
Federal and state governments have exhausted the options available to
protect the historical view of marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
In 1996, then-President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act that
protects states from having to give full faith and credit to same-sex
marriages contracted in other states.
A well-established rule of Conflict of Laws, the public policy
exception, also allows state courts to deny recognition to marriages that
offend the public policy of that state. Finally, some states, such as
Georgia explicitly ban homosexual marriages and treat them as void.
Experience, however, teaches that this legal "belt-and-suspenders"
approach, relying on federal and state statutes and legal doctrine, may
prove inadequate against the persistent pressure of a national "gay rights"
agenda or an uncritical and boundaryless notion of "equality."
It is precisely for such occasions that resorting to explicit
constitutional barriers is appropriate.
Several western states offer examples of how traditional marriage can
be protected constitutionally. Arizona, Idaho, New Mexico, Oklahoma and
Utah, for example, explicitly prohibit the adoption of laws authorizing
polygamy or plural marriage in their state constitutions. Why? To protect
against powerful Mormon constituencies, whose 19th-century adherents
practiced and promoted polygamy or "celestial" marriage. Constitutional
barriers can protect traditional marriage and have been used to guard
against odious onslaughts from politically powerful groups in our society.
Also, consider the effort to ban flag burning by federal and state
laws as opposed to a constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court struck
down both approaches in separate cases, despite the insistence of the
federal statute's ardent supporters that it would end the desecration of our
national symbol. It didn't work. The clear lesson is that only a
constitutional amendment will get the job done.
House Joint Resolution 56, the Federal Marriage Amendment, offers
protection for traditional marriage. It is comprised of a single section so
clear that neither Congress nor the courts can monkey around with it later
on. It provides the following: Marriage in the United States shall consist
only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution nor the
constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to
require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon
unmarried couples or groups.
Constitutional amendments are the main line of defense when deeply
held values are threatened. Americans who value traditional marriage must
demand that Congress act now on House Joint Resolution 56 to protect
marriage from attack. Reserved for critical matters, the process of
amending the U.S. Constitution is the best way to fence off future
legislative and judicial action. As the natural law cornerstone of society,
traditional marriage must be defended and protected.
. L. Lynn Hogue is legal advisory board chairman for Southeastern
Legal Foundation and a constitutional law professor at Georgia State
University College of Law.
USA Today, August 13, 2003
1000 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA, 22229
(Fax: 703-247-3108 ) (E-Mail: Editor@usatoday.com )
( http://www.usatoday.com )
http://www.usatoday.com/life/columnist/finalword/2003-08-12-final-word_x.htm
Final Word
Craig Wilson
Forget backlash: We're just another American family
I hesitate to write this column. I'm not a particularly political
person, and this space, over the years, has never been a platform for my
personal views or beliefs.
The furthest I've ever stuck my neck out has been to advocate the use
of Adirondack chairs, front porches and outdoor showers. I know most of you
prefer it that way. A brief respite from the day's news.
But over the years, I've mentioned my family on occasion. My partner
of 19 years, Jack, and our dog, Murphy, who turns 13 this fall. Both feisty
as ever, although Jack is slowing down a bit.
Many of you, actually hundreds of you, have e-mailed, thanking me for
talking about my "family" in such a casual, offhand manner. I never really
thought much about it. If I was going to write a column about little slices
of life, my life, it was inevitable they would be mentioned now and then.
When I don't mention Jack for a while, some of you even write to ask why.
Our life is nothing special. Maybe even a tad boring. We put out
the flag on holidays in honor of our dads who fought in World War II, we pay
our taxes, we go to our friends' kids' concerts. Our cousins, nieces and
nephews call us to gossip. We even have our Republican neighbors in for
drinks and a few laughs.
And, along with everyone else, we go to Safeway on Saturday mornings,
where I pull out my coupons in the checkout line, much to Jack's
embarrassment. An American tableau, to the point of parody.
So all the news of late has seemed, well, odd.
The president, when asked about gays, throws out the line "we're all
sinners." The pope issues another anti-gay missive, warning all Roman
Catholic politicians to toe the "family" line. Some bishops in the
Episcopal Church threaten to break away now that a gay man has been elected
to their ranks.
And a minister on CNN last week hauled out the old chestnut that gays
make a "choice" to live this life, adding the sinister "gay agenda" for good
measure.
How strange to be thought of as so dangerous, I thought, especially
since we have the nicest window boxes on the street. And the only agenda I
have is to get the windows washed before Labor Day.
I am not surprised by the recent news. Saddened, maybe. I foolishly
thought we had moved on.
The recent Supreme Court decision striking down sodomy laws and the
news that Wal-Mart was giving its employees domestic-partner benefits [not
true] gave a glimmer of hope that tolerance was winning out, that a part of
the population was finally being seen as just part of the mix. Not better.
Not worse. Just there, and recognized.
And now a backlash.
I'm probably more taken aback than most because I've lived in a
bubble for so long, in a neighborhood where I'm just Craig - the guy around
the corner, the guy with the dog that barks at people on bicycles, the guy
who takes in everyone's UPS packages. Why, there have been days here that
I've felt almost "normal."
Those of you who write on occasion, literally saying I'm going
straight to hell, will continue to give me fair warning, I'm sure. Fair
enough.
And I'm sure the shock jocks who have been reading these weekly
musings on the air for a couple of years now, and always with a lisp, will
continue to do so. At least, I hope they will. It's been great publicity.
And I'll continue to write about the little things in life, like
Adirondack chairs and the friends who come to sit in them, because in the
end, that's really what matters most.
Associated Press, August 13, 2003
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030813_1065.html
Gay Uzbek Journalist Convicted of Sodomy
Gay Journalist in Uzbekistan Convicted of Sodomy, Bringing Scorn From
International Groups
TASHKENT, Uzbekistan - An openly gay Uzbek journalist was found
guilty of sodomy Wednesday in a trial that highlighted concerns about media
freedoms and pressure against homosexuals in this tightly controlled Central
Asian country.
International human rights and press groups immediately condemned the
conviction as politically motivated.
A Tashkent district court convicted Ruslan Sharipov, 25, of having
homosexual sex, having sex with minors and running a brothel and sentenced
him to 5 1/2 years in jail, said Matilda Bogner, a researcher for Human
Rights Watch, quoting Sharipov's mother, Aza Sharipova.
Sharipov pleaded guilty and dismissed his lawyers at a hearing last
week, after earlier maintaining that he was innocent and the case
fabricated. His mother was the only outside observer allowed in the
courtroom Wednesday when the judge announced the punishment.
Court officials were not immediately reachable for further details.
Uzbekistan's human rights record has attracted more international
attention since the country allowed U.S. troops to use a military base here.
The Uzbek government tolerates no dissent, and politically motivated
prosecution of journalists is common.
Sharipov, who leads an independent group that focuses on media
freedom, has repeatedly been detained, beaten and questioned by police. His
case has also brought to light the lesser-publicized issue of the rights of
homosexuals.
Bogner said the conviction showed that "justice isn't served in
Uzbekistan and the judiciary isn't independent."
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission called for
Sharipov's immediate release and the dismissal of all charges against him.
It said there was a serious danger that he was being mistreated in custody.
The group, based in San Francisco, said Sharipov had told those who
had visited him in jail that he had been subjected to "continued and
escalating beatings, threats of sexual violence and verbal abuse."
The Paris-based media rights group, Reporters Without Borders,
expressed deep concern over Sharipov's case and demanded that the charges be
dropped.
"Everything indicates that Sharipov was arrested on false and sordid
pretenses designed to rid the authorities of a bothersome, dissident voice,"
the group's secretary general, Robert Menard, said in a letter to Uzbek
President Islam Karimov.
The New York-based Human Rights Watch has also urged Sharipov's
release and raised concerns that he was tortured to confess. A U.N. envoy
who visited Uzbekistan last year concluded that torture was systematic in
the nation's jails.
Drewitt-Barlow caused a furore when they became the first openly gay
surrogate parents. But the experience hasn't put them off trying it again
2. WASHINGTON TIMES Column: The marriage amendment (Of course, it's in
support.)
3. USA TODAY Forget backlash: We're just another American family
4. ASSOCIATED PRESS Gay Uzbek Journalist Convicted of Sodomy
The Guardian, August 13, 2003
119 Farringdon Rd., London EC1 3ER England
(Fax: +44/171/837-2114 ) (E-Mail: letters@guardian.co.uk )
( http://www.guardian.co.uk )
http://www.guardian.co.uk/parents/story/0,3605,1017338,00.html
A new kind of family
Tony and Barrie Drewitt-Barlow caused a furore when they became the first
openly gay surrogate parents. But, as they tell Joseph Galliano, the
experience hasn't put them off trying it again
"We are pregnant," announces Barrie, a proud father-to-be, who looks
with uncertainty at his partner of 15 years. "The baby is due on August
19." They had agreed to keep the baby's name secret for the time being but,
like most expectant fathers, he can barely contain himself. Tony smiles
gently and nods at him. "We are going to call him Orlando," Barrie squeals.
But these are no ordinary parents; these are the Drewitt-Barlows - and there
is not a bump or stretchmark between them.
Almost four years ago, Tony and Barrie Drewitt-Barlow made history.
They were the nation's first openly gay surrogate baby parents, and the
first men to be jointly listed on a birth certificate, after they won a
legal battle in the US, where the children were born. Between them the
couple fertilised 24 eggs that had been harvested from egg donor Tracie
Matthews, and two embryos were carried to term by the birth mother, Rosalind
Bellamy: a sexless ménage à quatre that resulted in the births of twins
Aspen and Saffron Drewitt-Barlow.
For all the costly procedures, press intrusion, criticism, battles
with the Home Office and even kidnap threats, they enjoyed parenthood enough
the first time round to try again. This time they have used eggs from the
original harvesting, but Orlando will have a different birth mother because
Bellamy talked to the tabloids.
Both being men, the odds were stacked against the Drewitt-Barlows
becoming parents together. They explored the adoption route, which was
barred to them because they were a gay couple. But rather than crush their
will, rejection spurred them forwards. "When I was told I wasn't fit to
adopt, the determination it gave me to have kids... " says Barrie, his voice
trailing away in anger.
They had important factors on their side: dogged determination,
advances in reproductive technology and, perhaps most importantly, money.
The couple spent around £200,000 having the twins. They sold their
dermatological product-testing business in 1998 for £4m. Tony juts his chin
forward and says, "Barrie and I don't pipe-dream. If we want something and
there's a way to get it, we will." And what they wanted, more than
anything, was to be joint parents.
Barrie says that he felt cheated that he couldn't have children: "I
knew that I'd be a good father and later I knew that Tony, as my partner,
would make a great dad. I wanted to have my children with Tony."
They met in 1988 on a Manchester garage forecourt, a meeting that
marked new beginnings for both men: "My life up to then had been
shoplifting in Manchester and doing a shitty job that I really hated," says
Barrie. Tony, who was only two weeks away from his wedding - to a woman -
had never slept with a man. Two weeks later he was on his honeymoon - but
with Barrie.
At the time of the twins' birth, the Drewitt-Barlows were a media
sensation. There was a documentary, endless column inches and castigating
editorials. They and their new twins were involved in high-speed car chases
with photographers, and doorstepped for interviews. They had helicopters
buzzing over their property to obtain photographs and Tony was once even
pounced on by Vanessa Feltz while he was having a business lunch.
Barrie and Tony still seem bemused by the attention, though not
enough to have shied away from it entirely: they talk of six-figure-sum
newspaper deals (not, it must be stressed, this one) and selling the first
pictures of Orlando. "Why on earth would anyone be interested in us having
a baby?" Tony says. "The attention at the beginning was amazing - what we
were doing wasn't unusual to our friends and family, it was a normal thing,
just Barrie and I having kids, nothing more that that. The shock for us was
that there was interest at all."
But, as one reporter put it to Tony: "Children are always an issue,
surrogacy is a thorny ethical debate, you're gay, you've got some cash - put
it all together and it's a great package." They were accused of ordering
designer babies over the internet, playing God, playing Frankenstein, and
both setting back the cause of and using babies as a pawn in the fight for
gay emancipation. However, says Barrie, "We didn't start our family as a
crusade for gay rights - it's of absolutely no interest to us at all."
Because of the media attention, they receive hundreds of letters a
year, many supportive, some threatening. One note asked: "If you paid
£200,000 for these kids, how much would you pay to get them back?" They
felt exposed where they were living in Essex, so they turned their house
into a fortress. Barrie says: "It was ridiculous - it was a quaint old
place, but we built a great brick wall around it and had security cameras
everywhere."
"All you want to do is protect your family," laughs Tony grimly.
"It's a macho ego thing."
But the home security modifications were not enough, and soon they
moved back to Manchester and their Canal Street penthouse. "It was great
for me and Tony," says Barrie. "We could hear music from the bars all night
and it was the safest we had felt since we returned from California, but it
wasn't the right environment for the children, and it's too easy to be
pulled into the gay ghetto."
They have, however, had their gay critics. "Why must this twee
dishonesty [being named as parents one and two on the twins' birth
certificates] be allowed to taint their parenthood from the start?" asked
Harry Coen, the former vice-chairman of the Campaign for Homosexual
Equality.
Tony maintains that they have not lied to Aspen and Saffron: "The
children know where they came from," he says. "At three years old they can
tell you the whole story - nothing has been kept from them. They know that
Daddy (Barrie) fertilised the female embryo and Dad (Tony) fertilised the
male embryo. There won't be some great revelation when they are 16. They
know that Tracie is their biological mother; there are photos of her all
over the place. Honesty was the only way." Being named on the birth
certificates affords both men the status of legal guardian to the children,
who are American citizens, outside Britain.
Security has remained an issue for them, and after they moved from
Canal Street to the farmhouse they currently live in near Macclesfield, they
were delighted to place Aspen and Saffron into the same school as Brooklyn
Beckham. It means that security is tight. Like the Beckhams, they are
shortly to move their permanent residence to Spain. They want some privacy
and, since retiring, are bored: "The only thing keeping us here is the
school term. We're not doing anything sat here in Cheshire, and we could be
sat out in the sun," huffs Barrie.
The children will be going to a Spanish school, but at their current
school, their origin and the family's dual-father status has rarely been
raised: "The gay part doesn't count in the Cheshire social set," says Tony.
"Money counts more than anything. We don't talk about relationships to the
other parents, just about holidays and what the kids are up to."
Even though the issue of the children's origins may have been skirted
round by other parents, there is an awareness of it. The children recently
went on their first school trip, and afterwards the teacher took Tony to one
side and told him how protective and affectionate the other mothers had been
towards the twins. "I see that all the time: people going over the top
wanting to help, thinking they have to make up for there being no mum
around," says Tony.
They recognise that their children will stand out because of the
unusual circumstances of their birth, and that this may lead to problems.
"There will be incidents and we'd be fools to pretend otherwise, but you
face it," says Tony. "Every child is different or feels that they are
different. I felt different in my teens because I was gay and hiding it,
but you deal with it."
They may stand out now, yet, Tony says, "We are a new kind of family
but in 10 years' time, we won't be." Procedures become cheaper and society
gets used to ideas. Recently, Tony was watching a chat show about gay dads
and IVF. One viewer phoned the show to say that he thought it was selfish
for gay men to use these technologies because their children might be
bullied at school, that it might be acceptable in the future but not now.
"My blood was boiling," says Tony. "We go through all this shit so that he
can do what he wants in 10 years' time. You have to break the rules
sometimes."
The Drewitt-Barlows are pregnant with contradictions: part social
experiment, part frontiersmen, and part future-family, but in so many ways a
deeply traditional unit. Says Tony: "The best thing is when the kids throw
their arms around you and say, 'Dad, I really love you,' and they give you a
big kiss. It's the most amazing, indescribable thing."
Washington Times, August 13, 2003
3600 New York Avenue NE, Washington, DC, 20002
(Fax: 202-269-3419 ) (E-Mail: letters@washingtontimes.com )
( http://www.washtimes.com/ )
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030812-100636-4016r.htm
The marriage amendment
By L. Lynn Hogue
Marriage has traditionally been a state matter under our federal
system, but states are now under focused pressure from special interests
that seek legitimacy for "homosexual marriage," which a clear majority of
Americans oppose.
So far, only a few states have been confronted with this issue, but
the impetus, as evidenced by the controversy that recently roiled the
Episcopal Church, is clearly there. Some states, like Vermont,
Massachusetts and Hawaii, have toyed with the idea of same-sex marriage
either in their courts or their legislature, and other states may in the
future. So-called civil unions, which provide equal benefits without
conferring the status of "marriage," are already in place in Vermont.
The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision guaranteeing homosexuals equal
treatment regarding sexual practices gives no special claim to marriage
rights. After all, many who have equal sexual autonomy are disqualified
from marriage because of, for example, close kinship, youth or the fact that
they are already married - despite the fact that marriage is a fundamental
interest under the Constitution. The question is, how can the American
majority protect against the special status sought by same-sex marriage
advocates?
The answer is clear - a federal constitutional amendment.
Americans use written constitutions to hamstring the government and
permanently fence off matters about which it can't be trusted. For example,
our forebears judged governments incompetent to protect such rights as free
speech or fair trials, so the federal and state constitutions take them off
the table. States couldn't be trusted to free slaves or confer citizenship
on African Americans, so it went into the Constitution. Some matters are to
remain forever beyond government's reach.
Federal and state governments have exhausted the options available to
protect the historical view of marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
In 1996, then-President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act that
protects states from having to give full faith and credit to same-sex
marriages contracted in other states.
A well-established rule of Conflict of Laws, the public policy
exception, also allows state courts to deny recognition to marriages that
offend the public policy of that state. Finally, some states, such as
Georgia explicitly ban homosexual marriages and treat them as void.
Experience, however, teaches that this legal "belt-and-suspenders"
approach, relying on federal and state statutes and legal doctrine, may
prove inadequate against the persistent pressure of a national "gay rights"
agenda or an uncritical and boundaryless notion of "equality."
It is precisely for such occasions that resorting to explicit
constitutional barriers is appropriate.
Several western states offer examples of how traditional marriage can
be protected constitutionally. Arizona, Idaho, New Mexico, Oklahoma and
Utah, for example, explicitly prohibit the adoption of laws authorizing
polygamy or plural marriage in their state constitutions. Why? To protect
against powerful Mormon constituencies, whose 19th-century adherents
practiced and promoted polygamy or "celestial" marriage. Constitutional
barriers can protect traditional marriage and have been used to guard
against odious onslaughts from politically powerful groups in our society.
Also, consider the effort to ban flag burning by federal and state
laws as opposed to a constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court struck
down both approaches in separate cases, despite the insistence of the
federal statute's ardent supporters that it would end the desecration of our
national symbol. It didn't work. The clear lesson is that only a
constitutional amendment will get the job done.
House Joint Resolution 56, the Federal Marriage Amendment, offers
protection for traditional marriage. It is comprised of a single section so
clear that neither Congress nor the courts can monkey around with it later
on. It provides the following: Marriage in the United States shall consist
only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution nor the
constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to
require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon
unmarried couples or groups.
Constitutional amendments are the main line of defense when deeply
held values are threatened. Americans who value traditional marriage must
demand that Congress act now on House Joint Resolution 56 to protect
marriage from attack. Reserved for critical matters, the process of
amending the U.S. Constitution is the best way to fence off future
legislative and judicial action. As the natural law cornerstone of society,
traditional marriage must be defended and protected.
. L. Lynn Hogue is legal advisory board chairman for Southeastern
Legal Foundation and a constitutional law professor at Georgia State
University College of Law.
USA Today, August 13, 2003
1000 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA, 22229
(Fax: 703-247-3108 ) (E-Mail: Editor@usatoday.com )
( http://www.usatoday.com )
http://www.usatoday.com/life/columnist/finalword/2003-08-12-final-word_x.htm
Final Word
Craig Wilson
Forget backlash: We're just another American family
I hesitate to write this column. I'm not a particularly political
person, and this space, over the years, has never been a platform for my
personal views or beliefs.
The furthest I've ever stuck my neck out has been to advocate the use
of Adirondack chairs, front porches and outdoor showers. I know most of you
prefer it that way. A brief respite from the day's news.
But over the years, I've mentioned my family on occasion. My partner
of 19 years, Jack, and our dog, Murphy, who turns 13 this fall. Both feisty
as ever, although Jack is slowing down a bit.
Many of you, actually hundreds of you, have e-mailed, thanking me for
talking about my "family" in such a casual, offhand manner. I never really
thought much about it. If I was going to write a column about little slices
of life, my life, it was inevitable they would be mentioned now and then.
When I don't mention Jack for a while, some of you even write to ask why.
Our life is nothing special. Maybe even a tad boring. We put out
the flag on holidays in honor of our dads who fought in World War II, we pay
our taxes, we go to our friends' kids' concerts. Our cousins, nieces and
nephews call us to gossip. We even have our Republican neighbors in for
drinks and a few laughs.
And, along with everyone else, we go to Safeway on Saturday mornings,
where I pull out my coupons in the checkout line, much to Jack's
embarrassment. An American tableau, to the point of parody.
So all the news of late has seemed, well, odd.
The president, when asked about gays, throws out the line "we're all
sinners." The pope issues another anti-gay missive, warning all Roman
Catholic politicians to toe the "family" line. Some bishops in the
Episcopal Church threaten to break away now that a gay man has been elected
to their ranks.
And a minister on CNN last week hauled out the old chestnut that gays
make a "choice" to live this life, adding the sinister "gay agenda" for good
measure.
How strange to be thought of as so dangerous, I thought, especially
since we have the nicest window boxes on the street. And the only agenda I
have is to get the windows washed before Labor Day.
I am not surprised by the recent news. Saddened, maybe. I foolishly
thought we had moved on.
The recent Supreme Court decision striking down sodomy laws and the
news that Wal-Mart was giving its employees domestic-partner benefits [not
true] gave a glimmer of hope that tolerance was winning out, that a part of
the population was finally being seen as just part of the mix. Not better.
Not worse. Just there, and recognized.
And now a backlash.
I'm probably more taken aback than most because I've lived in a
bubble for so long, in a neighborhood where I'm just Craig - the guy around
the corner, the guy with the dog that barks at people on bicycles, the guy
who takes in everyone's UPS packages. Why, there have been days here that
I've felt almost "normal."
Those of you who write on occasion, literally saying I'm going
straight to hell, will continue to give me fair warning, I'm sure. Fair
enough.
And I'm sure the shock jocks who have been reading these weekly
musings on the air for a couple of years now, and always with a lisp, will
continue to do so. At least, I hope they will. It's been great publicity.
And I'll continue to write about the little things in life, like
Adirondack chairs and the friends who come to sit in them, because in the
end, that's really what matters most.
Associated Press, August 13, 2003
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030813_1065.html
Gay Uzbek Journalist Convicted of Sodomy
Gay Journalist in Uzbekistan Convicted of Sodomy, Bringing Scorn From
International Groups
TASHKENT, Uzbekistan - An openly gay Uzbek journalist was found
guilty of sodomy Wednesday in a trial that highlighted concerns about media
freedoms and pressure against homosexuals in this tightly controlled Central
Asian country.
International human rights and press groups immediately condemned the
conviction as politically motivated.
A Tashkent district court convicted Ruslan Sharipov, 25, of having
homosexual sex, having sex with minors and running a brothel and sentenced
him to 5 1/2 years in jail, said Matilda Bogner, a researcher for Human
Rights Watch, quoting Sharipov's mother, Aza Sharipova.
Sharipov pleaded guilty and dismissed his lawyers at a hearing last
week, after earlier maintaining that he was innocent and the case
fabricated. His mother was the only outside observer allowed in the
courtroom Wednesday when the judge announced the punishment.
Court officials were not immediately reachable for further details.
Uzbekistan's human rights record has attracted more international
attention since the country allowed U.S. troops to use a military base here.
The Uzbek government tolerates no dissent, and politically motivated
prosecution of journalists is common.
Sharipov, who leads an independent group that focuses on media
freedom, has repeatedly been detained, beaten and questioned by police. His
case has also brought to light the lesser-publicized issue of the rights of
homosexuals.
Bogner said the conviction showed that "justice isn't served in
Uzbekistan and the judiciary isn't independent."
The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission called for
Sharipov's immediate release and the dismissal of all charges against him.
It said there was a serious danger that he was being mistreated in custody.
The group, based in San Francisco, said Sharipov had told those who
had visited him in jail that he had been subjected to "continued and
escalating beatings, threats of sexual violence and verbal abuse."
The Paris-based media rights group, Reporters Without Borders,
expressed deep concern over Sharipov's case and demanded that the charges be
dropped.
"Everything indicates that Sharipov was arrested on false and sordid
pretenses designed to rid the authorities of a bothersome, dissident voice,"
the group's secretary general, Robert Menard, said in a letter to Uzbek
President Islam Karimov.
The New York-based Human Rights Watch has also urged Sharipov's
release and raised concerns that he was tortured to confess. A U.N. envoy
who visited Uzbekistan last year concluded that torture was systematic in
the nation's jails.
Texas bishop asks England for guidance on gay bishop, sent aides scurrying
1. NEWS24.COM (South Africa) Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference reaffirms that "marriage is not for gays"
2. NATIONAL POST (Canada) Fab, a Toronto-based gay men's magazine, has
created its first wedding issue to help groom and groom plan their special
day
3. EDMONTON SUN Prime Minister Chretien sent aides scurrying yesterday to
correct some eyebrow-raising comments to reporters on same-sex marriage
4. ORLANDO SENTINEL Just because you're heterosexual doesn't mean
you're wrong
5. FREDERICKSBURG FREE LANCE-STAR (Virginia) Letter: Marriage is about
love; it is not about gender
6. HOUSTON CHRONICLE Texas bishop asks England for guidance on gay bishop
issue
News24.com (South Africa), August 13, 2003
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1401658,00.html
'Marriage not for gays'
Durban - The Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference on
Wednesday reaffirmed that their doctrine only allowed for one man to marry
one woman and that homosexual marriages were detrimental to society.
"Marriage is a faithful, exclusive, and permanent union between one
man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of
life and love," the senior clergymen said in a statement after a meeting at
Mariannhill outside Durban.
"By reason of its very nature, marriage exists for the mutual love
and support of the spouses and for the procreation and education of
children."
The bishops, who in terms of Catholic church law may not marry and
who are expected to live celibate lives, added that the "institution of
marriage has a very important relationship to the continuation of the human
race, to the total development of the human person, and to the dignity,
stability, peace, and prosperity of the family and of society".
The bishops made it clear that the institution of marriage, as the
union of one man and one woman, had to be preserved, protected and promoted
in both private and public.
Stress
"At a time when family life is under significant stress, the
principled defence of marriage is an urgent necessity for the wellbeing of
children and families, and for the common good of society. Society owes its
continued survival to the family. If same-sex unions were to be legalised,
the concept of marriage would be shattered, to the detriment of the common
good," they warned.
"By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane equal to that of
marriage and the family, the state acts against and in contradiction to its
duties. For the state to grant legal standing to homosexual unions is for
it to fail in its primary duty to promote and defend marriage as an
institution essential to the common good."
Freedom of choice was only good as long as the common good was
respected and protected, the bishops cautioned.
The statement came at a time that the worldwide Anglican communion
was teetering on the edge of a split over the election of a gay bishop in
the United States and ongoing efforts in South Africa to win recognition for
same-sex marriages.
- SAPA
National Post, August 13, 2003
300 - 1450 Don Mills Road, Don Mills, Ontario, M3B 3R5 Canada
(E-Mail: letters@nationalpost.com )(http://www.nationalpost.com )
http://www.canada.com/ottawa/news/story.asp?id=B61CC684-4995-43A6-9310-DE010
1DF6FE0
Gay bridal guide hits street
Fab magazine offers help to grooms on their special day
Samantha Grice, National Post
Two months after Ontario legally recognized same-sex marriage, Fab, a
Toronto-based gay men's magazine, has created its first bridal issue to help
groom and groom plan their special day.
The seventy-two page magazine is Fab's second-biggest issue ever,
next to their pride issue.
Martha Stewart need not worry, though. While the wedding guide
section does offer practical advice on wedding planners, florists,
invitations and cakes, much of the issue stays true to Fab's usual naughty
self as evidenced by the "The Fab Fairy Wedding Guide" cover boy, who is
decked out in white, leather harness and holding a phallic bouquet.
If you want to go to a bathhouse for your honeymoon, Fab will tell
you which one, and if you need to find a gay-friendly rabbi or minister, the
guide offers that, too.
That mix of traditional and flamboyant typifies the two schools of
thought on marriage within the gay community. While some couples are opting
for conventional church weddings with black-tie dress, others are taking the
drag queen and PVC gown route.
Fab has advice for both, but the editor-in-chief, Mitchel Raphael, is
hoping to see some flair. "There are gay people trying to take up the
challenge and being creative, which is what gay people are known for," he
says. "I got an invitation to a wedding last week and the dress code said
outrageous evening gala, so some people are definitely trying to do
over-the- top stuff."
Mr. Raphael himself is not a huge proponent of gay people joining the
often-dysfunctional institution of marriage. "I said they should call it
something else. My friend suggested 'knot' as in you're tying the knot, but
at the same time it gives a nod to S&M and tying other people up in your
knot," he says with a laugh.
So when the announcement came out on June 10 that gays could legally
marry, Mr. Raphael sarcastically mentioned in an editorial meeting that Fab
should do a bridal issue. "Everyone kind of smiled," he recalls. "But our
office is in the heart of the gay village and you look out the window and
you can actually see people getting married, so it made sense to put out a
guide explaining where you can get married and who will marry you. Those
basics are done in a very Fab way.
"Don't forget the law only passed two months ago and most people take
six months to a year to plan a wedding," Mr. Raphael says of the reasoning
behind the issue. "Those people who have been wanting to get married for
the last 30 years are going to be doing it in the next two. There will be a
whole wave and then it will start to peter out. It's kind of like the
double cohort times a thousand."
Mr. Raphael was keen to have the bridal issue offer a critique of
marriage and one essay is illustrated with a huge knife violently splitting
a wedding cake, slicing apart the two grooms on top. "What we've really
done is give a full spectrum on gay marriage," he says.
But the message Mr. Raphael really wants to send out to all the gays
considering matrimony is, "If you choose to get married, don't embarrass us.
Don't just do your bland, boring, typical wedding," he says. "That's the
question: Will they mimic [traditional weddings] or transform? The hope is
they will transform."
And the magazine gives hints on how they can differentiate their
special day from the sometimes drab efforts of heterosexuals: cakes topped
with disco balls, masculine bouquets and where to go for the "bachelor"
bachelor party.
Fab music editor, Elio Iannacci, has a feature on how to choose that
all-important song for the first groom-groom dance. For example, the
bisexual cross-dressing couple might enjoy No Ordinary Love by Sade. And
for the transsexual wedding, Mr. Iannacci thinks the Bee Gees' More than a
Woman would work best.
The Fab team scoured to find not just the top wedding vendors in
aesthetics, quality and creativity, but safe, gay-friendly businesses, too.
"It might not be the very best paper invitation place, but if Mike and Mike
walk in and tell the person they are getting married, they aren't going to
get sneered at," Mr. Raphael says. "It's important to know William Ashley
has had same-sex couples come in and register and it's not been a problem.
The wedding industry is already pretty gay to begin with," he says. "Now
that gays can get married, the whole thing is going to explode."
The magazine hits the streets tonight.
Edmonton Sun, August 13, 2003
#250, 4990-92 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6B 3A1 Canada
(E-Mail: sun.letters@ccinet.ab.ca )
( http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonSun/home.html )
http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonNews/es.es-08-13-0021.html
Gaffe on gays sends aides scurrying
By Bill Rodgers, Sun Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Jean Chretien sent senior aides scurrying
yesterday to correct some eyebrow-raising comments to reporters on same-sex
marriage.
Chretien said after a cabinet meeting, "We want to legalize the union
of homosexuals."
He added, "This is a question of civil unions."
Within minutes of the PM's departure, communications director Jim
Munson told reporters his boss made some "inadvertent" comments on the
matter - that Chretien remains firmly committed to the legalization of
same-sex marriages and not civil unions.
"Our position has not changed one iota," Munson said.
As for a recent warning from a Catholic bishop that he faced eternal
damnation for his position on the issue, Chretien said, "I'm a Catholic and
I'm praying.
"But I am the prime minister of Canada and ... I'm acting as a person
responsible for the nation.
"The problem of my religion - I deal with it in other circumstances."
While members of his cabinet will have to toe the line in a Commons
vote on the government bill, Chretien said backbench Grit MPs would be given
a free vote.
Many Liberal MPs have been getting an earful on the controversial
issue in their ridings this summer from constituents and outraged religious
leaders who oppose changing the definition of marriage to include same-sex
couples.
But Chretien and other members of his cabinet tried to calm concerns
in the religious community.
"We will not force any religion to recognize that" (same-sex
marriage), Chretien said. The government legislation "respected" the
question of religion, he said.
Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, who is responsible for ensuring
passage of the same-sex bill, said it upholds the equality provision of the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms while protecting the right of religious
belief.
Cauchon said he has no interest in a compromise that would leave the
definition of marriage intact by creating a new "civil union" category.
"Less than equal is less than adequate," said the justice minister.
"To create another institution just contributes to the fact that we would
tell those members of the gay and lesbian community that they are not
entirely part of our society. Why wouldn't they be part of marriage?"
Defence Minister John McCallum agreed, saying, "If people want to do
something and it doesn't hurt other people, doesn't reduce other people's
rights, we should let them do it. Why not?"
The matter is expected to dominate discussions when the Grits hold
their annual summer caucus next week in North Bay.
Orlando Sentinel, August 13, 2003
633 N. Orange Ave., Orlando, FL, 32801
(Fax: 407-420-5286 ) (E-Mail: insight@orlandosentinel.com )
( http://www.orlandosentinel.com )
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-edpparker13081303aug13,0,161
76.column?coll=orl-opinion-headlines
Just because you're heterosexual doesn't mean you're wrong
Kathleen Parker
Our either-or cultural template has come to an unattractive head
during the recent Gay Moment, as these days are being dubbed.
Of course we've already named it. We can't just let an epic or a
decade or a moment slip by without a title. A label. A category.
Labeling, in fact, is one of our favorite things in compulsive,
either/or America. As in, you're either for us or against us. You're
either from Mars or from Venus. You're either pro-gay marriage - or you're
a right-wing, fascist, dogmatic homophobe.
Well, no, not really. Sometimes you're not a homophobe, but you may
not be a homophile either. Sometimes you're not from Mars or from Venus.
Sometimes you're from Planet Earth, and, boy, is it lonely out here.
And, boy, things sure do change fast, as Dorothy once remarked to
Toto. Notice how easily Oz slips into conversation these days?
In a matter of weeks - mere nanoseconds if you're a millennium
gazer - we've passed from decriminalizing sodomy to ratifying a gay
Episcopal bishop to seriously pondering homosexual marriage. Heterosexual
marriage isn't doing so well, after all, so what's the big deal?
Frank Rich of The New York Times wrote as much Sunday, citing with
barely concealed hostility all things wrong with heterosexual unions - from
Ben Franklin's common-law marriage to Tracy 'n' Hepburn's illicit affair to
the new movie American Wedding, featuring a marriage proposal with dropped
trousers and a wedding cake adorned with pubic hair.
I'd say that settles it. Let the homosexual weddings begin!
Or not. In any case, dredging up the most extreme failings and
ludicrous fictional permutations of a long-honored institution may not be
the best argument for indictment. If perfection is our standard, we may as
well dismantle all our laws and institutions. We could start with traffic
lights. Given the number of people who run them, why not eliminate them
altogether?
The either/or notion, meanwhile, so polarizes rational discussion
that Americans are cowed into obedient silence. I'm familiar with the
inclination, having been on the receiving end of various fatwas for
criticizing individuals who identify with a disenfranchised group. That
would include nearly everyone except white heterosexual males, about which
one can say anything with impunity.
If you criticize a person who happens to be black, for example,
you're automatically a "racist." A black columnist once told me he wanted
to write about the difficulties facing adolescent white boys but felt it
might be taken the wrong way. Too bad. I wanted to read it.
Presidential hopeful Al Sharpton recently played the race card when
he claimed that the media are ignoring him because he's black, ergo, the
media are racist. No, the chorus might say were the chorus not so
intimidated by the charge, the media are ignoring Sharpton because he can't
be taken seriously.
If you suggest as President Bush did - in the most temperate way
possible - that marriage is intended for a man and a woman in order to
procreate and raise children, you're quickly labeled homophobic. The best
"gay" counterargument is to point out that plenty of heterosexual couples,
such as Sen. John Kerry, are in post-childbearing marriages.
And so what? Plenty of couples are also infertile. Lots are
miserable. But those facts hardly alter the obvious biological design or
necessitate alteration of societal structures organized to nurture the
ideal.
Let's ignore God (that should be easy enough), and all our gay
friends and relatives for just a minute (not so easy), and try to be
objective. Is gay marriage constructive? Is it useful to society? Does it
solve any problem that can't be solved any other way? I'm unconvinced by
arguments favoring holy matrimony for homosexuals when civil remedies are -
or can be made - available.
It seems unnecessary, meanwhile, to justify and explain all the
reasons why marriage between a man and a woman is beneficial and necessary
to civilization. It seems equally unnecessary to jettison our most
fundamental social institution in order to accommodate and sanction marriage
between two men or two women. As Jonah Goldberg wrote, "in a sane world
there would be no need for a 'ban' on gay marriage because marriage means
the union between a man and a woman."
Whatever we decide - and gay marriage may win the day - people are
not wrong to be concerned. And it is not homophobic to suggest that we may
have lost our minds.
. Kathleen Parker can be reached at kparker@orlandosentinel.com or
407-420-5202.
Fredericksburg Free Lance Star, August 13, 2003
P. O. Box 617, Fredericksburg, VA, 22401
(Fax: 703-373-8450 ) (E-Mail: letters@freelancestar.com )
(http://www.freelancestar.com )
http://www.freelancestar.com/News/FLS/2003/082003/08132003/1061298
Letter: Marriage is about love; it is not about gender
In the weeks that have passed since the Supreme Court overthrew the
Texas (and by extension Virginia) anti-sodomy laws, not once have I felt the
urge to practice homosexual sex. So far, I've been able to resist the urge
to run to Canada and marry another man.
Since those two changes, I haven't noticed my family dissolving or my
kids suddenly rebelling. I've not noticed a change in the values or morals
we teach our children, nor have I felt my personal ethics deteriorating.
Needless to say, I'm pretty sure my marriage and family will survive
the time when gays are granted the same right to declare their love for
another through marriage. Marriage is about love between two people.
Marriage is not about raising children. If it were, we would not allow
couples who either cannot or will not bear children to get married.
Marriage is not about family. If it were, we would not allow
unmarried couples to form family bonds. Marriage is about love. If that
love is between a man and a woman, a black and a white, an older person and
a younger person, or a man and another man, the defining element of marriage
is love.
I'm going to continue to teach my children to love and care for
themselves and others. And when the United States finally allows gays the
same rights as others, the family values that I have taught my children will
not be diminished one bit. Just what are your "family values" that would be
hurt by legalizing gay marriage?
- Stephen F. Roberts, Spotsylvania
Houston Chronicle, August 13, 2003
801 Texas Avenue, Houston, TX, 77002
(Fax: 713-220-6575 ) (E-Mail: viewpoints@chron.com )
( http://www.chron.com/ )
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2044889
Texas bishop asks England for guidance
By Richard Vara, Houston Chronicle Religion Editor
The bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Texas wants to meet with the
Archbishop of Canterbury to seek "guidance and wisdom" in dealing with the
election of the nation's first gay bishop.
Bishop Don A. Wimberly, who opposed the election, urged Texas
Episcopalians to stay with the church.
"Our church is facing a significant challenge to our common life,"
Wimberly said in a pastoral letter sent late Monday to the diocese's 160
parishes and missions. "In light of this challenge, I am in conversation
with other American bishops who are requesting a meeting with Archbishop
(Rowan) Williams to seek his guidance and wisdom."
Williams, who is titular head of the worldwide Anglican Communion,
already has called an October meeting of the 38 heads of national churches
in an effort to head off a schism.
Several national churches are threatening to sever ties with the
American church over the confirmation of V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay
man, as bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire. Primates of Africa and
Asia, who are conservative on biblical interpretation and sexual morality,
have scheduled a meeting next month to deal with the issue.
Wimberly said he wrote the letter "with a heavy heart."
At a national meeting last week, Wimberly and the eight-member
delegation from the diocese, which stretches from Austin into East Texas,
opposed Robinson's approval and an effort to establish rituals for the
blessing of same-sex unions. The General Convention acknowledged such
blessings to be "within the bounds of our common life."
"As your bishop, I wish to state clearly that I will not allow the
blessing of same-sex unions in the Diocese of Texas," Wimberly said in his
letter. "Additionally, I will not ordain or license for ordained ministry
any person living in a sexual relationship other than a sacramental marriage
between a man and a woman.
"I believe this to be consistent with both the traditional teaching
of the church and our diocesan canons," Wimberly said, adding that he
realized some people would disagree with his position.
Wimberly's letter also urged the 86,000 Episcopalians of the diocese
to support the "holy calling" of their congregations through their
"continued attendance, active participation and prayer."
"Our strength is in our adherence to Christ's call to us to be a holy
people bound to him and one another for the redemption of the world," he
cautioned. "Please understand that we are engaging in a process that will
take time and don't allow media reports to determine your faith life."
Some priests in the diocese said Tuesday they had heard from church
members who planned to leave.
At St. Dunstan's Church in Houston, about 200 of the 275 people
people at Sunday's 9 a.m. service remained for more than an hour to discuss
the actions of the General Convention, the Rev. John Bentley said Tuesday.
"We had quite a few calls and e-mails who expressed dismay at what
had happened," said Bentley, who had not received Wimberly's letter. A few
members said they would no longer participate.
In his sermon, the rector urged church members to wait and see what
happened in the October meeting. "My intent was to try to let people know
we needed to take some time rather than make a knee-jerk reaction," Bentley
said.
2. NATIONAL POST (Canada) Fab, a Toronto-based gay men's magazine, has
created its first wedding issue to help groom and groom plan their special
day
3. EDMONTON SUN Prime Minister Chretien sent aides scurrying yesterday to
correct some eyebrow-raising comments to reporters on same-sex marriage
4. ORLANDO SENTINEL Just because you're heterosexual doesn't mean
you're wrong
5. FREDERICKSBURG FREE LANCE-STAR (Virginia) Letter: Marriage is about
love; it is not about gender
6. HOUSTON CHRONICLE Texas bishop asks England for guidance on gay bishop
issue
News24.com (South Africa), August 13, 2003
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1401658,00.html
'Marriage not for gays'
Durban - The Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference on
Wednesday reaffirmed that their doctrine only allowed for one man to marry
one woman and that homosexual marriages were detrimental to society.
"Marriage is a faithful, exclusive, and permanent union between one
man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of
life and love," the senior clergymen said in a statement after a meeting at
Mariannhill outside Durban.
"By reason of its very nature, marriage exists for the mutual love
and support of the spouses and for the procreation and education of
children."
The bishops, who in terms of Catholic church law may not marry and
who are expected to live celibate lives, added that the "institution of
marriage has a very important relationship to the continuation of the human
race, to the total development of the human person, and to the dignity,
stability, peace, and prosperity of the family and of society".
The bishops made it clear that the institution of marriage, as the
union of one man and one woman, had to be preserved, protected and promoted
in both private and public.
Stress
"At a time when family life is under significant stress, the
principled defence of marriage is an urgent necessity for the wellbeing of
children and families, and for the common good of society. Society owes its
continued survival to the family. If same-sex unions were to be legalised,
the concept of marriage would be shattered, to the detriment of the common
good," they warned.
"By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane equal to that of
marriage and the family, the state acts against and in contradiction to its
duties. For the state to grant legal standing to homosexual unions is for
it to fail in its primary duty to promote and defend marriage as an
institution essential to the common good."
Freedom of choice was only good as long as the common good was
respected and protected, the bishops cautioned.
The statement came at a time that the worldwide Anglican communion
was teetering on the edge of a split over the election of a gay bishop in
the United States and ongoing efforts in South Africa to win recognition for
same-sex marriages.
- SAPA
National Post, August 13, 2003
300 - 1450 Don Mills Road, Don Mills, Ontario, M3B 3R5 Canada
(E-Mail: letters@nationalpost.com )(http://www.nationalpost.com )
http://www.canada.com/ottawa/news/story.asp?id=B61CC684-4995-43A6-9310-DE010
1DF6FE0
Gay bridal guide hits street
Fab magazine offers help to grooms on their special day
Samantha Grice, National Post
Two months after Ontario legally recognized same-sex marriage, Fab, a
Toronto-based gay men's magazine, has created its first bridal issue to help
groom and groom plan their special day.
The seventy-two page magazine is Fab's second-biggest issue ever,
next to their pride issue.
Martha Stewart need not worry, though. While the wedding guide
section does offer practical advice on wedding planners, florists,
invitations and cakes, much of the issue stays true to Fab's usual naughty
self as evidenced by the "The Fab Fairy Wedding Guide" cover boy, who is
decked out in white, leather harness and holding a phallic bouquet.
If you want to go to a bathhouse for your honeymoon, Fab will tell
you which one, and if you need to find a gay-friendly rabbi or minister, the
guide offers that, too.
That mix of traditional and flamboyant typifies the two schools of
thought on marriage within the gay community. While some couples are opting
for conventional church weddings with black-tie dress, others are taking the
drag queen and PVC gown route.
Fab has advice for both, but the editor-in-chief, Mitchel Raphael, is
hoping to see some flair. "There are gay people trying to take up the
challenge and being creative, which is what gay people are known for," he
says. "I got an invitation to a wedding last week and the dress code said
outrageous evening gala, so some people are definitely trying to do
over-the- top stuff."
Mr. Raphael himself is not a huge proponent of gay people joining the
often-dysfunctional institution of marriage. "I said they should call it
something else. My friend suggested 'knot' as in you're tying the knot, but
at the same time it gives a nod to S&M and tying other people up in your
knot," he says with a laugh.
So when the announcement came out on June 10 that gays could legally
marry, Mr. Raphael sarcastically mentioned in an editorial meeting that Fab
should do a bridal issue. "Everyone kind of smiled," he recalls. "But our
office is in the heart of the gay village and you look out the window and
you can actually see people getting married, so it made sense to put out a
guide explaining where you can get married and who will marry you. Those
basics are done in a very Fab way.
"Don't forget the law only passed two months ago and most people take
six months to a year to plan a wedding," Mr. Raphael says of the reasoning
behind the issue. "Those people who have been wanting to get married for
the last 30 years are going to be doing it in the next two. There will be a
whole wave and then it will start to peter out. It's kind of like the
double cohort times a thousand."
Mr. Raphael was keen to have the bridal issue offer a critique of
marriage and one essay is illustrated with a huge knife violently splitting
a wedding cake, slicing apart the two grooms on top. "What we've really
done is give a full spectrum on gay marriage," he says.
But the message Mr. Raphael really wants to send out to all the gays
considering matrimony is, "If you choose to get married, don't embarrass us.
Don't just do your bland, boring, typical wedding," he says. "That's the
question: Will they mimic [traditional weddings] or transform? The hope is
they will transform."
And the magazine gives hints on how they can differentiate their
special day from the sometimes drab efforts of heterosexuals: cakes topped
with disco balls, masculine bouquets and where to go for the "bachelor"
bachelor party.
Fab music editor, Elio Iannacci, has a feature on how to choose that
all-important song for the first groom-groom dance. For example, the
bisexual cross-dressing couple might enjoy No Ordinary Love by Sade. And
for the transsexual wedding, Mr. Iannacci thinks the Bee Gees' More than a
Woman would work best.
The Fab team scoured to find not just the top wedding vendors in
aesthetics, quality and creativity, but safe, gay-friendly businesses, too.
"It might not be the very best paper invitation place, but if Mike and Mike
walk in and tell the person they are getting married, they aren't going to
get sneered at," Mr. Raphael says. "It's important to know William Ashley
has had same-sex couples come in and register and it's not been a problem.
The wedding industry is already pretty gay to begin with," he says. "Now
that gays can get married, the whole thing is going to explode."
The magazine hits the streets tonight.
Edmonton Sun, August 13, 2003
#250, 4990-92 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6B 3A1 Canada
(E-Mail: sun.letters@ccinet.ab.ca )
( http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonSun/home.html )
http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonNews/es.es-08-13-0021.html
Gaffe on gays sends aides scurrying
By Bill Rodgers, Sun Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Jean Chretien sent senior aides scurrying
yesterday to correct some eyebrow-raising comments to reporters on same-sex
marriage.
Chretien said after a cabinet meeting, "We want to legalize the union
of homosexuals."
He added, "This is a question of civil unions."
Within minutes of the PM's departure, communications director Jim
Munson told reporters his boss made some "inadvertent" comments on the
matter - that Chretien remains firmly committed to the legalization of
same-sex marriages and not civil unions.
"Our position has not changed one iota," Munson said.
As for a recent warning from a Catholic bishop that he faced eternal
damnation for his position on the issue, Chretien said, "I'm a Catholic and
I'm praying.
"But I am the prime minister of Canada and ... I'm acting as a person
responsible for the nation.
"The problem of my religion - I deal with it in other circumstances."
While members of his cabinet will have to toe the line in a Commons
vote on the government bill, Chretien said backbench Grit MPs would be given
a free vote.
Many Liberal MPs have been getting an earful on the controversial
issue in their ridings this summer from constituents and outraged religious
leaders who oppose changing the definition of marriage to include same-sex
couples.
But Chretien and other members of his cabinet tried to calm concerns
in the religious community.
"We will not force any religion to recognize that" (same-sex
marriage), Chretien said. The government legislation "respected" the
question of religion, he said.
Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, who is responsible for ensuring
passage of the same-sex bill, said it upholds the equality provision of the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms while protecting the right of religious
belief.
Cauchon said he has no interest in a compromise that would leave the
definition of marriage intact by creating a new "civil union" category.
"Less than equal is less than adequate," said the justice minister.
"To create another institution just contributes to the fact that we would
tell those members of the gay and lesbian community that they are not
entirely part of our society. Why wouldn't they be part of marriage?"
Defence Minister John McCallum agreed, saying, "If people want to do
something and it doesn't hurt other people, doesn't reduce other people's
rights, we should let them do it. Why not?"
The matter is expected to dominate discussions when the Grits hold
their annual summer caucus next week in North Bay.
Orlando Sentinel, August 13, 2003
633 N. Orange Ave., Orlando, FL, 32801
(Fax: 407-420-5286 ) (E-Mail: insight@orlandosentinel.com )
( http://www.orlandosentinel.com )
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-edpparker13081303aug13,0,161
76.column?coll=orl-opinion-headlines
Just because you're heterosexual doesn't mean you're wrong
Kathleen Parker
Our either-or cultural template has come to an unattractive head
during the recent Gay Moment, as these days are being dubbed.
Of course we've already named it. We can't just let an epic or a
decade or a moment slip by without a title. A label. A category.
Labeling, in fact, is one of our favorite things in compulsive,
either/or America. As in, you're either for us or against us. You're
either from Mars or from Venus. You're either pro-gay marriage - or you're
a right-wing, fascist, dogmatic homophobe.
Well, no, not really. Sometimes you're not a homophobe, but you may
not be a homophile either. Sometimes you're not from Mars or from Venus.
Sometimes you're from Planet Earth, and, boy, is it lonely out here.
And, boy, things sure do change fast, as Dorothy once remarked to
Toto. Notice how easily Oz slips into conversation these days?
In a matter of weeks - mere nanoseconds if you're a millennium
gazer - we've passed from decriminalizing sodomy to ratifying a gay
Episcopal bishop to seriously pondering homosexual marriage. Heterosexual
marriage isn't doing so well, after all, so what's the big deal?
Frank Rich of The New York Times wrote as much Sunday, citing with
barely concealed hostility all things wrong with heterosexual unions - from
Ben Franklin's common-law marriage to Tracy 'n' Hepburn's illicit affair to
the new movie American Wedding, featuring a marriage proposal with dropped
trousers and a wedding cake adorned with pubic hair.
I'd say that settles it. Let the homosexual weddings begin!
Or not. In any case, dredging up the most extreme failings and
ludicrous fictional permutations of a long-honored institution may not be
the best argument for indictment. If perfection is our standard, we may as
well dismantle all our laws and institutions. We could start with traffic
lights. Given the number of people who run them, why not eliminate them
altogether?
The either/or notion, meanwhile, so polarizes rational discussion
that Americans are cowed into obedient silence. I'm familiar with the
inclination, having been on the receiving end of various fatwas for
criticizing individuals who identify with a disenfranchised group. That
would include nearly everyone except white heterosexual males, about which
one can say anything with impunity.
If you criticize a person who happens to be black, for example,
you're automatically a "racist." A black columnist once told me he wanted
to write about the difficulties facing adolescent white boys but felt it
might be taken the wrong way. Too bad. I wanted to read it.
Presidential hopeful Al Sharpton recently played the race card when
he claimed that the media are ignoring him because he's black, ergo, the
media are racist. No, the chorus might say were the chorus not so
intimidated by the charge, the media are ignoring Sharpton because he can't
be taken seriously.
If you suggest as President Bush did - in the most temperate way
possible - that marriage is intended for a man and a woman in order to
procreate and raise children, you're quickly labeled homophobic. The best
"gay" counterargument is to point out that plenty of heterosexual couples,
such as Sen. John Kerry, are in post-childbearing marriages.
And so what? Plenty of couples are also infertile. Lots are
miserable. But those facts hardly alter the obvious biological design or
necessitate alteration of societal structures organized to nurture the
ideal.
Let's ignore God (that should be easy enough), and all our gay
friends and relatives for just a minute (not so easy), and try to be
objective. Is gay marriage constructive? Is it useful to society? Does it
solve any problem that can't be solved any other way? I'm unconvinced by
arguments favoring holy matrimony for homosexuals when civil remedies are -
or can be made - available.
It seems unnecessary, meanwhile, to justify and explain all the
reasons why marriage between a man and a woman is beneficial and necessary
to civilization. It seems equally unnecessary to jettison our most
fundamental social institution in order to accommodate and sanction marriage
between two men or two women. As Jonah Goldberg wrote, "in a sane world
there would be no need for a 'ban' on gay marriage because marriage means
the union between a man and a woman."
Whatever we decide - and gay marriage may win the day - people are
not wrong to be concerned. And it is not homophobic to suggest that we may
have lost our minds.
. Kathleen Parker can be reached at kparker@orlandosentinel.com or
407-420-5202.
Fredericksburg Free Lance Star, August 13, 2003
P. O. Box 617, Fredericksburg, VA, 22401
(Fax: 703-373-8450 ) (E-Mail: letters@freelancestar.com )
(http://www.freelancestar.com )
http://www.freelancestar.com/News/FLS/2003/082003/08132003/1061298
Letter: Marriage is about love; it is not about gender
In the weeks that have passed since the Supreme Court overthrew the
Texas (and by extension Virginia) anti-sodomy laws, not once have I felt the
urge to practice homosexual sex. So far, I've been able to resist the urge
to run to Canada and marry another man.
Since those two changes, I haven't noticed my family dissolving or my
kids suddenly rebelling. I've not noticed a change in the values or morals
we teach our children, nor have I felt my personal ethics deteriorating.
Needless to say, I'm pretty sure my marriage and family will survive
the time when gays are granted the same right to declare their love for
another through marriage. Marriage is about love between two people.
Marriage is not about raising children. If it were, we would not allow
couples who either cannot or will not bear children to get married.
Marriage is not about family. If it were, we would not allow
unmarried couples to form family bonds. Marriage is about love. If that
love is between a man and a woman, a black and a white, an older person and
a younger person, or a man and another man, the defining element of marriage
is love.
I'm going to continue to teach my children to love and care for
themselves and others. And when the United States finally allows gays the
same rights as others, the family values that I have taught my children will
not be diminished one bit. Just what are your "family values" that would be
hurt by legalizing gay marriage?
- Stephen F. Roberts, Spotsylvania
Houston Chronicle, August 13, 2003
801 Texas Avenue, Houston, TX, 77002
(Fax: 713-220-6575 ) (E-Mail: viewpoints@chron.com )
( http://www.chron.com/ )
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2044889
Texas bishop asks England for guidance
By Richard Vara, Houston Chronicle Religion Editor
The bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Texas wants to meet with the
Archbishop of Canterbury to seek "guidance and wisdom" in dealing with the
election of the nation's first gay bishop.
Bishop Don A. Wimberly, who opposed the election, urged Texas
Episcopalians to stay with the church.
"Our church is facing a significant challenge to our common life,"
Wimberly said in a pastoral letter sent late Monday to the diocese's 160
parishes and missions. "In light of this challenge, I am in conversation
with other American bishops who are requesting a meeting with Archbishop
(Rowan) Williams to seek his guidance and wisdom."
Williams, who is titular head of the worldwide Anglican Communion,
already has called an October meeting of the 38 heads of national churches
in an effort to head off a schism.
Several national churches are threatening to sever ties with the
American church over the confirmation of V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay
man, as bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire. Primates of Africa and
Asia, who are conservative on biblical interpretation and sexual morality,
have scheduled a meeting next month to deal with the issue.
Wimberly said he wrote the letter "with a heavy heart."
At a national meeting last week, Wimberly and the eight-member
delegation from the diocese, which stretches from Austin into East Texas,
opposed Robinson's approval and an effort to establish rituals for the
blessing of same-sex unions. The General Convention acknowledged such
blessings to be "within the bounds of our common life."
"As your bishop, I wish to state clearly that I will not allow the
blessing of same-sex unions in the Diocese of Texas," Wimberly said in his
letter. "Additionally, I will not ordain or license for ordained ministry
any person living in a sexual relationship other than a sacramental marriage
between a man and a woman.
"I believe this to be consistent with both the traditional teaching
of the church and our diocesan canons," Wimberly said, adding that he
realized some people would disagree with his position.
Wimberly's letter also urged the 86,000 Episcopalians of the diocese
to support the "holy calling" of their congregations through their
"continued attendance, active participation and prayer."
"Our strength is in our adherence to Christ's call to us to be a holy
people bound to him and one another for the redemption of the world," he
cautioned. "Please understand that we are engaging in a process that will
take time and don't allow media reports to determine your faith life."
Some priests in the diocese said Tuesday they had heard from church
members who planned to leave.
At St. Dunstan's Church in Houston, about 200 of the 275 people
people at Sunday's 9 a.m. service remained for more than an hour to discuss
the actions of the General Convention, the Rev. John Bentley said Tuesday.
"We had quite a few calls and e-mails who expressed dismay at what
had happened," said Bentley, who had not received Wimberly's letter. A few
members said they would no longer participate.
In his sermon, the rector urged church members to wait and see what
happened in the October meeting. "My intent was to try to let people know
we needed to take some time rather than make a knee-jerk reaction," Bentley
said.
A straight woman in Northampton, Costa Mesa drops restrictions on march; You think it's easy putting together an annual Dyke March?
1. CHICAGO TRIBUNE A straight woman in Northampton: Shedding the tourist
mind-set in Lesbianville
2. COSTA MESA DAILY PILOT (California) Costa Mesa drops restrictions on march; Organizers of Lesbian pride parade say they are pleased with the
decision, but lawsuit will go on to prevent future problems
3. LOS ANGELES TIMES Deterring a Flood of 'Dyke' Insults: You think it's easy putting together an annual Dyke March?
4. LOS ANGELES TIMES Four letters: Episcopal Decision on Gays in the
Church
5. PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS Gay Community Day at Phillies: To most fans it
was just another game
6. PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS Two letters: The Great Gay Marriage Debate
Chicago Tribune, August 13, 2003
435 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60611
(Fax: 312-222-2598 ) (E-Mail: ctc-tribletter@tribune.com )
( http://www.chicagotribune.com )
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/women/chi-0308130004aug13,1,4173417.s
tory
First Person: Shedding the tourist mind-set in Lesbianville
By Elissa Alford, Special to the Tribune.
I live in a town once called Lesbianville by a television news
magazine. I didn't know that before I moved here, though I did know the
town had a large population of lesbians. This is one of the few places in
the country where two women can feel secure having a visible relationship.
When we first saw Northampton, I was taken by the qualities that
prompted our move: small town New England beauty, progressive people, great
colleges, a strong arts scene. I also liked the fact that we were moving
from a place particularly accepting of gay men - San Francisco - to a place
comparable for gay women. While my husband was job hunting we had visited
areas that were not so tolerant, and had decided we couldn't be comfortable
there. We both unequivocally support gay rights.
After the cross-country jaunt, however, I went through an adjustment.
I had grown used to gay men, but lesbians, when they had greater prominence,
were suddenly something new. I found myself noticing and trying to
categorize: This woman looked stereotypically butch; that one didn't; those
two women walking together - were they a couple? And did they judge me
somehow for being straight, and not part of the Club? At moments I imagined
myself to be as invisible as I had been on Castro Street in San Francisco,
which was completely.
All of my reactions felt prejudiced. At the very least, extremely
naive. But they were there, and I realized I still had some learning to do
about the sexual spectrum. In high school, when I was just becoming aware
of same-sex relationships, I had felt hip because I had a whopping crush on
Elton John, whose bisexuality only added to his rock star mystique. But
even in liberal Santa Cruz, Calif., circa 1974, lesbianism was not as
mainstream, and was still defined to some degree, in my teenage years, by
stereotypes.
When I moved to San Francisco in my 20s, I was around a lot of gay
men for the first time. I noticed overt displays of orientation the way you
notice the locals when you travel somewhere on vacation. Gay men were both
part of my new city's scenery and of a sometimes distinct culture.
Eventually I learned that you could no more make assumptions about men who
were gay than anyone else on the planet - that people were always
individuals.
Now I felt like a tourist again. It didn't seem to matter that we
had had both lesbian and gay friends for years. En masse, lesbians were
exotic, curiosity-provoking: What drew a feminine-looking woman to a woman
who looked male, instead of desiring a man? And what did it mean that I
cared. At some point I realized I was both trying to assimilate the
unfamiliar and unravel the entire mystery of sexual attraction.
It's embarrassing to look back and dissect this process. I can see
now that I moved from a primitive response (the different Camp), to
interest, to having the noticing fade, to no particular reaction at all,
most of the time. But I would experience something similar, probably, if I
were dropped into an African-American neighborhood, having lived in
predominantly white ones. That's a hard admission, but any otherness I felt
would soon lose significance, as it should.
Our lesbian population is visible in a way I enjoy: Adopted kids are
everywhere, giving this area many dashes of skin color and background.
Chinese, Cambodian, Indian, Hispanic children in the arms of two loving
women - this town is bountiful with the maternal energy of double mothers,
and some of the world's most diverse family groups. I look around at
church, at the yearly town spelling bee, and it seems a fantasy of diversity
and tolerance.
Am I backward to still be noticing my neighbors, even in this
positive way? I don't think so. It's the eyes taking in something of
interest, and the heart and mind making meaning of it. Now I enjoy waking
up again to the unusual place I live. In an ideal world none of it would
strike me or be part of the road to complete acceptance: not the feeling of
intrigue (Elton John), the awareness of the sexual scenery (San Francisco),
or the wonderful (double mothers). It would just be what is.
Our social circle here consists more of lesbian couples than straight
ones. So much so that being out the other night with another husband and
wife felt peculiar. The energy was different somehow. Men and women
interacted in subtly different ways than women did together, something I'd
never noticed before. The way John looked at Marsha, and vice versa ... the
cross-interactions of the four of us. It was so ... well, heterosexual.
It kind of made me uneasy. And there I was, doing it again -
noticing, adjusting to the unfamiliar.
. Elissa Alford is a writer based in Northampton, Mass.
Costa Mesa Daily Pilot, August 13, 2003
330 West Bay Street, Costa Mesa, CA, 92626
(Fax: 949-642-4321) (E-Mail: dailypilot@latimes.com )
( http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot )
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/la-dpt-dykemarch13aug13,1,62388
32.story
Costa Mesa drops restrictions on march
Organizers of Lesbian pride parade say they are pleased with the decision,
but lawsuit will go on to prevent future problems.
Paul Clinton, Daily Pilot
COSTA MESA - As an olive branch to organizers of the second Orange
County Dyke March, city leaders have backed away from the bulk of a 21-point
rule book imposed on organizers of the Saturday parade.
After a series of meetings with attorneys from the group on Friday,
city officials elected to drop restrictions on the use of the motorcycles
and a requirement that riders submit copies of their driver's licenses, said
Tom Wood, the acting city attorney.
"We were trying to reach an accommodation to ensure the public is
protected in their safety, but still allow the participants to have their
free expression," Wood said.
Last week, lawyers with the American Civil Liberties Union challenged
the city's operating permit on the grounds that it hampered the group's
First Amendment rights to gather publicly and express their views.
The Gay & Lesbian Community Services Center of Orange County is
staging the rally and march beginning at noon on Saturday at Lions Park.
A spokeswoman with the group lauded the city's decision to drop
restrictions.
"We're really pleased," said Tricia Aynes. "It's going to allow us
to go forward with the march as planned."
The group applied for a city permit to hold the event for a second
consecutive year June 18. Shortly after that, the city issued a permit with
18 restrictions. At an Aug. 4 meeting, the City Council broadened its
restrictions to 21.
Twelve conditions have been retained, Wood said.
The hard-line stance, officials said, came about after a rider in
last year's event popped a wheelie on her bike after a police officer asked
her not to.
Despite the city's concessions, Dyke March organizers said they would
continue to pursue the lawsuit against Costa Mesa to stave off any similar
restrictions next year.
"We will still have our day in court," Aynes said. "The lawsuit is
designed to settle this matter once and for all."
Councilman Mike Scheafer, an insurance agent himself, said the
restrictions were designed to protect the city from legal risk. He said the
group is still required to present "financial responsibility" in the form of
insurance coverage.
"What if they lose control of the bike and they run over somebody,"
Scheafer said. "Is the city responsible? We owe it to the citizens of
Costa Mesa [to make sure] that we don't fall into a litigation or liability
trap."
Scheafer said he hoped to avoid an incident similar to the one that
derailed the Fish Fry. That long-running community event was held at Orange
Coast College in 2000. At the event, a woman claimed she hurt her ankle
when she fell off a curb and sued. Her civil lawsuit was settled out of
court for $30,000.
The event was halted for two years until this June, when a
scaled-back version was put on at Lions Park.
. Paul Clinton covers the environment, business and politics. He may
be reached at (949) 764-4330 or by e-mail at paul.clinton@latimes.com.
Los Angeles Times, August 13, 2003
Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA, 90053
(Fax: 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319 ) (E-Mail: letters@latimes.com )
( http://www.latimes.com )
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-parsons13aug13,1,1038218.story
Deterring a Flood of 'Dyke' Insults
Dana Parsons
You think it's easy putting together an annual Dyke March?
There's the fund-raising. You've got to choose the date. You've got
to line up the entertainment (one of this year's attractions: Hamburger
Mary's Drag Show). You have to get the park permit from the city and then a
permit for the marchers' route. And then you have to get the word out to
maximize turnout, if only to avoid this question: What if they threw a dyke
march and nobody came?
So, these last few months have been busy for Lori Hutson, who's
handling the press for the march Saturday in Costa Mesa.
And now, with just a few days to go, everything has fallen neatly in
place. The grunt work has been done, and as for the all-important
publicity - well, the sponsors can thank the Costa Mesa City Council for
making the event more visible than it could have hoped for.
By imposing some tough permit conditions and prompting the American
Civil Liberties Union to threaten to take it to court, the council - before
basically giving up the fight - has given the marchers the kind of publicity
they couldn't buy.
"Any publicity is good publicity for an event like this," says the
savvy Hutson, "so it [the flap with the city] did play into it a little
bit."
The Dyke March is similar to those held in other cities in America.
Its purpose, Hutson says, is to "promote visibility of lesbians, bisexual
and transgender women." At its core is a protest over the way those people
are treated in society, from subtle to not-so-subtle harassment or outright
discrimination.
For that reason, the march through a small section of Costa Mesa
won't be called a parade. "We're trying to keep it known as a march,
because a march makes you think of protest," Hutson says. "A parade is more
of a celebration type of thing."
I had to ask her: Do you really need a march? While many gay people
prefer to live their lives without undue attention, why such a public
display of one's sexuality?
"The more visible we are in everyday life, the less we'll be
discriminated against," Hutson says. "Some of the older generation, they
probably can't believe we're using the word 'dyke.' "
But, she says, "because the [event] is for lesbians, bisexuals and
transgenders, it wouldn't make sense for it to be called a lesbian march."
Besides, she says, "the more we use the word and the more we're
comfortable with it, the less hurtful it is when some redneck driving down
the street yells, 'Dyke!' Then we can say, 'Thanks for noticing.' "
Saturday's event starts at noon in Lions Park. The march is
scheduled for 5 p.m. and will wend its way from the park and finish up
around 19th Street and Newport Boulevard.
The event sponsors won their fight with the city, but Hutson isn't
gloating. She knows she should thank the council for the free pub.
I ask if the idea is to be provocative. "I think we are pushing the
envelope in Orange County, if only because that, except for last year's
march, this is the first gay event held on a public street since 1989,"
Hutson says. "It's like people know the gay community exists but don't want
to talk about it. But the tradition of dyke marches has been to definitely
push the envelope and be as out there as possible. I don't know that that
was necessarily our intention. Ours was mainly to make it a comfortable and
safe environment for other women in Orange County to come out here and be
with us."
Given the distaste some residents will have for the march, I ask
Hutson if it advances the cause. "Every inconvenience, every negative
remark," she says, "was offset last year by one 17-year-old girl who said,
'This is the first time I've ever been around other lesbians, and I'm so
thankful.'"
. Dana Parsons' column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He
can be reached at (714) 966-7821, at dana.parsons@latimes.com or at The
Times' Orange County edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626.
Los Angeles Times, August 13, 2003
Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA, 90053
(Fax: 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319 ) (E-Mail: letters@latimes.com )
( http://www.latimes.com )
Letters: Episcopal Decision on Gays in the Church
Re "Episcopal Church Plays Russian Roulette on the Gay Issue," by
Charlotte Allen, Opinion, Aug. 10: Without faithful clergy and laypeople
who are willing to be condemned and vilified for their questioning of the
familiar and comfortable status quo, we would still be a nation divided by
legalized slavery and codified segregation. Each of these social wrongs was
defended by proponents who cited selected passages from biblical Scripture.
Perhaps if we look 50 or 150 years down the road the Episcopal Church
in the United States will be vindicated for its stand on the issue of
homosexuality.
- Rebecca Merwin, Alhambra
Allen cannot have it both ways. On the one hand, she says the
Episcopal Church has "painted itself into a corner of trendiness." On the
other hand, she blames the denomination's 30-year decline in membership on
its trendiness. Whoa! As politicians know, pandering to trends is repaid
with popularity, not unpopularity. If the sustained course of the Episcopal
Church results in declining popularity, as Allen maintains, then that course
obviously does not pander to trends.
On the contrary, adhering to principles that lose members better
resembles adhering to unpopular ideas that one nonetheless believes true -
and paying the price in unpopularity. Jesus was not popular either. He
paid the price.
Allen's self-contradictory argument insidiously turns religious truth
into a popularity contest.
- Ivan Light, Claremont
As a lifetime Episcopalian, I am filled with grief over the
appointment of the Rev. Canon V. Gene Robinson, a practicing homosexual, as
a bishop of my church. It's as if the church has finally been successful in
killing itself off. It's as if the resurrected Jesus has been put to death
again.
- James M. Evans, Orange
Although Jesus was very specific in condemning divorce, he said
nothing about gays being excluded from church leadership. I'm wondering if
all this religious angst about gays will someday be about as controversial
as divorce is today in our church. Do we care what Jesus' sexual
orientation was? Why do we assume he was heterosexual?
- Marshal Phillips, Los Angeles
Philadelphia Daily News, August 13, 2003
400 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, PA, 19101
(Fax: 215-854-5691) (E-Mail: dailynews.opinion@phillynews.com )
( http://www.philly.com )
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/news/local/6520499.htm
Gay Community Day at Phillies
To most fans it was just another game
By Adjoa Adofo, adofoa@phillynews.com
America's favorite pastime met modern day USA when the Phillies
hosted "Gay Community Day" during last night's game against the Milwaukee
Brewers.
Some said the event was about a major league baseball team reaching
out to it's gay fans.
Other said the event represented the buying power of the gay
community.
But to the celebrants, they were just enjoying their favorite team.
"It wasn't meant to be political. This was envisioned as a night of
fun. I love coming to Vet stadium and seeing baseball," said Larry Felzer,
chair of Gay and Lesbian Lawyers of Philadelphia.
Felzer worked with the Philadelphia chapter of the National Lesbian
and Gay Journalists Association and the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association
to sponsor and sell 549 tickets, well past the 350 ticket minimum to have a
special night under the Phillies's community partnership program.
For his efforts, Felzer got to throw out the first pitch to the
Philly Phanatic. Nervous but beaming, Felzer blushed deep pink after
receiving a big sloppy kiss from the Phanatic.
"I've been pinching myself all day. It's exciting that I get to
stand on the field among my favorite players," he said.
The thrill was not just felt by Felzer as Gay Day members danced in
the stands, waving rainbow flags.
"It's nice to see people out. It makes you feel part of society,"
said Laurie Klein, 43, of West Chester.
"We are just regular people who are Phillies fans too," chimed in her
partner of 16 years, Eileen Stuart, 56.
Klein admitted feeling nervous participating in Gay Day.
"You never know if there is a crazy person" who believes attending
the game was also "making a statement," said Klein.
A sense of uneasiness was also shared by others.
Kim, 32, from Delaware County, who did not want her last name used
for fear of losing her job, said she was "still a bit closeted."
But Donald or "Donna May," a cross-dressing lawyer in a cheerleader's
uniform, from Pennsauken isn't worried about dissenters.
"There is always a chance that I might run into a homophobe but I
have my friends here," he said.
There was no sign of hostility throughout the game. Participants
said they hoped Gay Day will become an annual event.
"Everybody seems to have embraced it. We will plan accordingly,"
said Kathy Killian, group sales manager for the Phillies.
In the meantime the only thing that seemed to concern Felzer was the
game.
"If the Phillies lose that could ruin the event for us. We can't do
anything about that except to cheer for them," said Felzer.
Sadly, the Phillies lost 6 to 3.
mind-set in Lesbianville
2. COSTA MESA DAILY PILOT (California) Costa Mesa drops restrictions on march; Organizers of Lesbian pride parade say they are pleased with the
decision, but lawsuit will go on to prevent future problems
3. LOS ANGELES TIMES Deterring a Flood of 'Dyke' Insults: You think it's easy putting together an annual Dyke March?
4. LOS ANGELES TIMES Four letters: Episcopal Decision on Gays in the
Church
5. PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS Gay Community Day at Phillies: To most fans it
was just another game
6. PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS Two letters: The Great Gay Marriage Debate
Chicago Tribune, August 13, 2003
435 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60611
(Fax: 312-222-2598 ) (E-Mail: ctc-tribletter@tribune.com )
( http://www.chicagotribune.com )
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/women/chi-0308130004aug13,1,4173417.s
tory
First Person: Shedding the tourist mind-set in Lesbianville
By Elissa Alford, Special to the Tribune.
I live in a town once called Lesbianville by a television news
magazine. I didn't know that before I moved here, though I did know the
town had a large population of lesbians. This is one of the few places in
the country where two women can feel secure having a visible relationship.
When we first saw Northampton, I was taken by the qualities that
prompted our move: small town New England beauty, progressive people, great
colleges, a strong arts scene. I also liked the fact that we were moving
from a place particularly accepting of gay men - San Francisco - to a place
comparable for gay women. While my husband was job hunting we had visited
areas that were not so tolerant, and had decided we couldn't be comfortable
there. We both unequivocally support gay rights.
After the cross-country jaunt, however, I went through an adjustment.
I had grown used to gay men, but lesbians, when they had greater prominence,
were suddenly something new. I found myself noticing and trying to
categorize: This woman looked stereotypically butch; that one didn't; those
two women walking together - were they a couple? And did they judge me
somehow for being straight, and not part of the Club? At moments I imagined
myself to be as invisible as I had been on Castro Street in San Francisco,
which was completely.
All of my reactions felt prejudiced. At the very least, extremely
naive. But they were there, and I realized I still had some learning to do
about the sexual spectrum. In high school, when I was just becoming aware
of same-sex relationships, I had felt hip because I had a whopping crush on
Elton John, whose bisexuality only added to his rock star mystique. But
even in liberal Santa Cruz, Calif., circa 1974, lesbianism was not as
mainstream, and was still defined to some degree, in my teenage years, by
stereotypes.
When I moved to San Francisco in my 20s, I was around a lot of gay
men for the first time. I noticed overt displays of orientation the way you
notice the locals when you travel somewhere on vacation. Gay men were both
part of my new city's scenery and of a sometimes distinct culture.
Eventually I learned that you could no more make assumptions about men who
were gay than anyone else on the planet - that people were always
individuals.
Now I felt like a tourist again. It didn't seem to matter that we
had had both lesbian and gay friends for years. En masse, lesbians were
exotic, curiosity-provoking: What drew a feminine-looking woman to a woman
who looked male, instead of desiring a man? And what did it mean that I
cared. At some point I realized I was both trying to assimilate the
unfamiliar and unravel the entire mystery of sexual attraction.
It's embarrassing to look back and dissect this process. I can see
now that I moved from a primitive response (the different Camp), to
interest, to having the noticing fade, to no particular reaction at all,
most of the time. But I would experience something similar, probably, if I
were dropped into an African-American neighborhood, having lived in
predominantly white ones. That's a hard admission, but any otherness I felt
would soon lose significance, as it should.
Our lesbian population is visible in a way I enjoy: Adopted kids are
everywhere, giving this area many dashes of skin color and background.
Chinese, Cambodian, Indian, Hispanic children in the arms of two loving
women - this town is bountiful with the maternal energy of double mothers,
and some of the world's most diverse family groups. I look around at
church, at the yearly town spelling bee, and it seems a fantasy of diversity
and tolerance.
Am I backward to still be noticing my neighbors, even in this
positive way? I don't think so. It's the eyes taking in something of
interest, and the heart and mind making meaning of it. Now I enjoy waking
up again to the unusual place I live. In an ideal world none of it would
strike me or be part of the road to complete acceptance: not the feeling of
intrigue (Elton John), the awareness of the sexual scenery (San Francisco),
or the wonderful (double mothers). It would just be what is.
Our social circle here consists more of lesbian couples than straight
ones. So much so that being out the other night with another husband and
wife felt peculiar. The energy was different somehow. Men and women
interacted in subtly different ways than women did together, something I'd
never noticed before. The way John looked at Marsha, and vice versa ... the
cross-interactions of the four of us. It was so ... well, heterosexual.
It kind of made me uneasy. And there I was, doing it again -
noticing, adjusting to the unfamiliar.
. Elissa Alford is a writer based in Northampton, Mass.
Costa Mesa Daily Pilot, August 13, 2003
330 West Bay Street, Costa Mesa, CA, 92626
(Fax: 949-642-4321) (E-Mail: dailypilot@latimes.com )
( http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot )
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/la-dpt-dykemarch13aug13,1,62388
32.story
Costa Mesa drops restrictions on march
Organizers of Lesbian pride parade say they are pleased with the decision,
but lawsuit will go on to prevent future problems.
Paul Clinton, Daily Pilot
COSTA MESA - As an olive branch to organizers of the second Orange
County Dyke March, city leaders have backed away from the bulk of a 21-point
rule book imposed on organizers of the Saturday parade.
After a series of meetings with attorneys from the group on Friday,
city officials elected to drop restrictions on the use of the motorcycles
and a requirement that riders submit copies of their driver's licenses, said
Tom Wood, the acting city attorney.
"We were trying to reach an accommodation to ensure the public is
protected in their safety, but still allow the participants to have their
free expression," Wood said.
Last week, lawyers with the American Civil Liberties Union challenged
the city's operating permit on the grounds that it hampered the group's
First Amendment rights to gather publicly and express their views.
The Gay & Lesbian Community Services Center of Orange County is
staging the rally and march beginning at noon on Saturday at Lions Park.
A spokeswoman with the group lauded the city's decision to drop
restrictions.
"We're really pleased," said Tricia Aynes. "It's going to allow us
to go forward with the march as planned."
The group applied for a city permit to hold the event for a second
consecutive year June 18. Shortly after that, the city issued a permit with
18 restrictions. At an Aug. 4 meeting, the City Council broadened its
restrictions to 21.
Twelve conditions have been retained, Wood said.
The hard-line stance, officials said, came about after a rider in
last year's event popped a wheelie on her bike after a police officer asked
her not to.
Despite the city's concessions, Dyke March organizers said they would
continue to pursue the lawsuit against Costa Mesa to stave off any similar
restrictions next year.
"We will still have our day in court," Aynes said. "The lawsuit is
designed to settle this matter once and for all."
Councilman Mike Scheafer, an insurance agent himself, said the
restrictions were designed to protect the city from legal risk. He said the
group is still required to present "financial responsibility" in the form of
insurance coverage.
"What if they lose control of the bike and they run over somebody,"
Scheafer said. "Is the city responsible? We owe it to the citizens of
Costa Mesa [to make sure] that we don't fall into a litigation or liability
trap."
Scheafer said he hoped to avoid an incident similar to the one that
derailed the Fish Fry. That long-running community event was held at Orange
Coast College in 2000. At the event, a woman claimed she hurt her ankle
when she fell off a curb and sued. Her civil lawsuit was settled out of
court for $30,000.
The event was halted for two years until this June, when a
scaled-back version was put on at Lions Park.
. Paul Clinton covers the environment, business and politics. He may
be reached at (949) 764-4330 or by e-mail at paul.clinton@latimes.com.
Los Angeles Times, August 13, 2003
Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA, 90053
(Fax: 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319 ) (E-Mail: letters@latimes.com )
( http://www.latimes.com )
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-parsons13aug13,1,1038218.story
Deterring a Flood of 'Dyke' Insults
Dana Parsons
You think it's easy putting together an annual Dyke March?
There's the fund-raising. You've got to choose the date. You've got
to line up the entertainment (one of this year's attractions: Hamburger
Mary's Drag Show). You have to get the park permit from the city and then a
permit for the marchers' route. And then you have to get the word out to
maximize turnout, if only to avoid this question: What if they threw a dyke
march and nobody came?
So, these last few months have been busy for Lori Hutson, who's
handling the press for the march Saturday in Costa Mesa.
And now, with just a few days to go, everything has fallen neatly in
place. The grunt work has been done, and as for the all-important
publicity - well, the sponsors can thank the Costa Mesa City Council for
making the event more visible than it could have hoped for.
By imposing some tough permit conditions and prompting the American
Civil Liberties Union to threaten to take it to court, the council - before
basically giving up the fight - has given the marchers the kind of publicity
they couldn't buy.
"Any publicity is good publicity for an event like this," says the
savvy Hutson, "so it [the flap with the city] did play into it a little
bit."
The Dyke March is similar to those held in other cities in America.
Its purpose, Hutson says, is to "promote visibility of lesbians, bisexual
and transgender women." At its core is a protest over the way those people
are treated in society, from subtle to not-so-subtle harassment or outright
discrimination.
For that reason, the march through a small section of Costa Mesa
won't be called a parade. "We're trying to keep it known as a march,
because a march makes you think of protest," Hutson says. "A parade is more
of a celebration type of thing."
I had to ask her: Do you really need a march? While many gay people
prefer to live their lives without undue attention, why such a public
display of one's sexuality?
"The more visible we are in everyday life, the less we'll be
discriminated against," Hutson says. "Some of the older generation, they
probably can't believe we're using the word 'dyke.' "
But, she says, "because the [event] is for lesbians, bisexuals and
transgenders, it wouldn't make sense for it to be called a lesbian march."
Besides, she says, "the more we use the word and the more we're
comfortable with it, the less hurtful it is when some redneck driving down
the street yells, 'Dyke!' Then we can say, 'Thanks for noticing.' "
Saturday's event starts at noon in Lions Park. The march is
scheduled for 5 p.m. and will wend its way from the park and finish up
around 19th Street and Newport Boulevard.
The event sponsors won their fight with the city, but Hutson isn't
gloating. She knows she should thank the council for the free pub.
I ask if the idea is to be provocative. "I think we are pushing the
envelope in Orange County, if only because that, except for last year's
march, this is the first gay event held on a public street since 1989,"
Hutson says. "It's like people know the gay community exists but don't want
to talk about it. But the tradition of dyke marches has been to definitely
push the envelope and be as out there as possible. I don't know that that
was necessarily our intention. Ours was mainly to make it a comfortable and
safe environment for other women in Orange County to come out here and be
with us."
Given the distaste some residents will have for the march, I ask
Hutson if it advances the cause. "Every inconvenience, every negative
remark," she says, "was offset last year by one 17-year-old girl who said,
'This is the first time I've ever been around other lesbians, and I'm so
thankful.'"
. Dana Parsons' column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He
can be reached at (714) 966-7821, at dana.parsons@latimes.com or at The
Times' Orange County edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626.
Los Angeles Times, August 13, 2003
Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA, 90053
(Fax: 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319 ) (E-Mail: letters@latimes.com )
( http://www.latimes.com )
Letters: Episcopal Decision on Gays in the Church
Re "Episcopal Church Plays Russian Roulette on the Gay Issue," by
Charlotte Allen, Opinion, Aug. 10: Without faithful clergy and laypeople
who are willing to be condemned and vilified for their questioning of the
familiar and comfortable status quo, we would still be a nation divided by
legalized slavery and codified segregation. Each of these social wrongs was
defended by proponents who cited selected passages from biblical Scripture.
Perhaps if we look 50 or 150 years down the road the Episcopal Church
in the United States will be vindicated for its stand on the issue of
homosexuality.
- Rebecca Merwin, Alhambra
Allen cannot have it both ways. On the one hand, she says the
Episcopal Church has "painted itself into a corner of trendiness." On the
other hand, she blames the denomination's 30-year decline in membership on
its trendiness. Whoa! As politicians know, pandering to trends is repaid
with popularity, not unpopularity. If the sustained course of the Episcopal
Church results in declining popularity, as Allen maintains, then that course
obviously does not pander to trends.
On the contrary, adhering to principles that lose members better
resembles adhering to unpopular ideas that one nonetheless believes true -
and paying the price in unpopularity. Jesus was not popular either. He
paid the price.
Allen's self-contradictory argument insidiously turns religious truth
into a popularity contest.
- Ivan Light, Claremont
As a lifetime Episcopalian, I am filled with grief over the
appointment of the Rev. Canon V. Gene Robinson, a practicing homosexual, as
a bishop of my church. It's as if the church has finally been successful in
killing itself off. It's as if the resurrected Jesus has been put to death
again.
- James M. Evans, Orange
Although Jesus was very specific in condemning divorce, he said
nothing about gays being excluded from church leadership. I'm wondering if
all this religious angst about gays will someday be about as controversial
as divorce is today in our church. Do we care what Jesus' sexual
orientation was? Why do we assume he was heterosexual?
- Marshal Phillips, Los Angeles
Philadelphia Daily News, August 13, 2003
400 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, PA, 19101
(Fax: 215-854-5691) (E-Mail: dailynews.opinion@phillynews.com )
( http://www.philly.com )
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/news/local/6520499.htm
Gay Community Day at Phillies
To most fans it was just another game
By Adjoa Adofo, adofoa@phillynews.com
America's favorite pastime met modern day USA when the Phillies
hosted "Gay Community Day" during last night's game against the Milwaukee
Brewers.
Some said the event was about a major league baseball team reaching
out to it's gay fans.
Other said the event represented the buying power of the gay
community.
But to the celebrants, they were just enjoying their favorite team.
"It wasn't meant to be political. This was envisioned as a night of
fun. I love coming to Vet stadium and seeing baseball," said Larry Felzer,
chair of Gay and Lesbian Lawyers of Philadelphia.
Felzer worked with the Philadelphia chapter of the National Lesbian
and Gay Journalists Association and the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association
to sponsor and sell 549 tickets, well past the 350 ticket minimum to have a
special night under the Phillies's community partnership program.
For his efforts, Felzer got to throw out the first pitch to the
Philly Phanatic. Nervous but beaming, Felzer blushed deep pink after
receiving a big sloppy kiss from the Phanatic.
"I've been pinching myself all day. It's exciting that I get to
stand on the field among my favorite players," he said.
The thrill was not just felt by Felzer as Gay Day members danced in
the stands, waving rainbow flags.
"It's nice to see people out. It makes you feel part of society,"
said Laurie Klein, 43, of West Chester.
"We are just regular people who are Phillies fans too," chimed in her
partner of 16 years, Eileen Stuart, 56.
Klein admitted feeling nervous participating in Gay Day.
"You never know if there is a crazy person" who believes attending
the game was also "making a statement," said Klein.
A sense of uneasiness was also shared by others.
Kim, 32, from Delaware County, who did not want her last name used
for fear of losing her job, said she was "still a bit closeted."
But Donald or "Donna May," a cross-dressing lawyer in a cheerleader's
uniform, from Pennsauken isn't worried about dissenters.
"There is always a chance that I might run into a homophobe but I
have my friends here," he said.
There was no sign of hostility throughout the game. Participants
said they hoped Gay Day will become an annual event.
"Everybody seems to have embraced it. We will plan accordingly,"
said Kathy Killian, group sales manager for the Phillies.
In the meantime the only thing that seemed to concern Felzer was the
game.
"If the Phillies lose that could ruin the event for us. We can't do
anything about that except to cheer for them," said Felzer.
Sadly, the Phillies lost 6 to 3.
Canada update: Gay marriage bill faces challenge - Liberal faction plans to press PM for change - Top court seen as unlikely to accept 'civil unions'
Toronto Star, August 12, 2003
One Yonge Street, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1E6 Canada
(E-Mail: lettertoed@thestar.ca ) ( http://www.thestar.com/ )
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Artic
le_Type1&c=Article&cid=1060639815207&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154
Gay marriage bill faces challenge - Liberal faction plans to press PM for change - Top court seen as unlikely to accept 'civil union' option
Tonda MacCharles and Les Whittington, Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA - A group of Liberal backbenchers has mounted a last-minute
campaign to ask Prime Minister Jean Chrétien to drop the word "marriage"
from draft legislation on same-sex matrimony being sent to the Supreme Court
of Canada for a ruling.
"If the word 'marriage' is a problem, then why are we as legislators
using the word 'marriage'?" Liberal caucus chair Stan Keyes asked in an
interview yesterday. "To my way of thinking, wouldn't it be more acceptable
(to) Canadian society to say, as lawmakers, that we are going to call it a
civil union?"
But some government strategists say the Supreme Court is unlikely to
accept such "separate-but-equal" arrangements - an approach already rejected
by lower courts.
Keyes, who often speaks for a powerful faction of Paul Martin
supporters in the Commons, said many caucus members want the government to
pull back its reference to the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage and
rewrite the proposed bill in the face of mounting opposition from religious
groups.
"If the government pulled the reference back and redrew the proposal
to acknowledge our responsibility of recognizing same-sex couples in a civil
union, I think, for the most part, most Canadians would agree with that and
support across the country would rise dramatically."
Mike Murphy, a spokesperson for Justice Minister Martin Cauchon,
declined comment on the backbenchers' demand, expected to be made at next
week's caucus meeting in North Bay, saying "we haven't seen any suggestions
to that effect.
"The government has made the reference because we believe we've taken
the right approach, a balanced approach," he added.
Other senior strategists say the notion of asking the high court to
examine "civil unions" or registered partnerships is certain to be viewed by
the justices as a halfway measure - one specifically rejected by lower
courts.
"Some are still wondering if the courts would not allow for some
other alternative, a civil union or a separate track," said one adviser.
"But the advice we're getting is (the courts) would see this as a sort of
'separate-but-equal' arrangement which would not past muster as equality."
But at the same time, another official, who asked to remain
anonymous, conceded submitting the "civil union" concept to the court "is a
possibility" as a political move to address the issue once and for all, but
stressed the government is committed to the reference as is.
The Chrétien government asked the high court last month for an
opinion on the constitutionality of a draft bill that proposes extending
"access to marriage for civil purposes to couples of the same sex."
The proposed law specifies that "religious groups are free to refuse
to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious
beliefs."
It became clear yesterday that government strategists are also
shifting tactics. They said the job of persuading Liberals and other
Canadians to support the legislation lies not only with Chrétien and
Cauchon, but also with cabinet members and leadership heir apparent Martin.
"This is a shared burden. Mr. Martin, if he is to be the next prime
minister, has indicated that he supports it too," one strategist said.
The Chrétien government badly needs to show some momentum for its
policy because, even though the Supreme Court of Canada is likely to take up
to a year to first hear, and then decide on, the reference case, a
potentially embarrassing vote is looming within weeks when the Commons
resumes sitting in mid-September.
The Canadian Alliance intends to use one of its Opposition days in
Parliament to force a vote on a motion that repeats word-for-word a 1999
motion - unanimously supported by the Liberal government - that said
"marriage is and should remain the union of one man and one woman to the
exclusion of all others."
"Four years ago, the vote was unanimous in cabinet and caucus to
reaffirm the traditional definition," said one source.
"We're quite struck by the fact that it's now clearly a majority in
the Liberal caucus that is in favour of (redefining marriage) and this is a
pretty rapid evolution."
To boost support for the initiative, Cauchon will make a series of
speeches, starting with a major address to the Canadian Bar Association
Monday in Montreal billed as a "rallying cry."
Yesterday, EGALE, a national advocacy group for gay and lesbian
rights, denounced the idea of "civil unions" or "registered partnerships"
saying it would "send the inescapable message that the government sees us as
second-class citizens."
"Registered partnerships are no substitute for equal marriage," said
Laurie Arron, director of advocacy for EGALE.
"Imagine if the federal government prohibited interracial couples or
Jewish couples from marrying, but said we'll let you register your
partnership instead. The very idea is offensive and demeaning."
A spokesperson for Martin said yesterday he was unaware of the
backbenchers' plan to push for "civil unions." Martin, the odds-on
favourite to succeed Chrétien, supports the decision to refer the issue to
the high court "because it is helpful to clarify any legal issues associated
with this important question."
Still, it is unclear whether Martin clearly supports the draft bill
before the high court as now worded.
On July 30, Martin told reporters he is "a practising Catholic" and
recognized "there is obviously a division of opinion within the country."
"On the other hand, the courts have spoken and governments cannot
discriminate on the basis of rights. But one thing should be very clear -
no church, not my church, no temple, no mosque, no synagogue will be asked
to perform marriage in any way other than they see fit," Martin said.
Asked about the government's effort to spread around the burden of
selling gay marriages, Martin spokesperson Scott Reid said: "Dealing with
this issue is not a burden. It is a responsibility and it comes with being
an elected member of Parliament. Mr. Martin bears that responsibility along
with all of his colleagues."
Keyes said Liberal MPs are badly split over the proposed bill to
legalize gay marriages that the government has submitted for constitutional
review, and differ for the most part "because of the definition of marriage"
proposed by the government.
A civil union "would recognize the civil rights and obligations that
flow from a contractual agreement between two people," Keyes said. "A civil
union recognizes the union of two persons to the exclusion of all others -
there's the definition.
He said the term "marriage" should be left to religious institutions.
"If people want to get married and they want to go to their church to marry
and the church does not for some reason recognize gay couples getting
married, then let the church deal with it."
He said the government has already recognized gays should have full
civil rights.
Government insiders say Chrétien "had no illusions" about the
opposition mounting within caucus as he heads to next week's summer caucus
retreat in North Bay.
"He expected that it would heat up, that it was going to take a lot
of discussion and he also understands that in some cases these are deeply
held views - and this is part of the reasoning in indicating a commitment
... that it ought to ultimately be a free vote," one insider said.
One Yonge Street, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1E6 Canada
(E-Mail: lettertoed@thestar.ca ) ( http://www.thestar.com/ )
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Artic
le_Type1&c=Article&cid=1060639815207&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154
Gay marriage bill faces challenge - Liberal faction plans to press PM for change - Top court seen as unlikely to accept 'civil union' option
Tonda MacCharles and Les Whittington, Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA - A group of Liberal backbenchers has mounted a last-minute
campaign to ask Prime Minister Jean Chrétien to drop the word "marriage"
from draft legislation on same-sex matrimony being sent to the Supreme Court
of Canada for a ruling.
"If the word 'marriage' is a problem, then why are we as legislators
using the word 'marriage'?" Liberal caucus chair Stan Keyes asked in an
interview yesterday. "To my way of thinking, wouldn't it be more acceptable
(to) Canadian society to say, as lawmakers, that we are going to call it a
civil union?"
But some government strategists say the Supreme Court is unlikely to
accept such "separate-but-equal" arrangements - an approach already rejected
by lower courts.
Keyes, who often speaks for a powerful faction of Paul Martin
supporters in the Commons, said many caucus members want the government to
pull back its reference to the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage and
rewrite the proposed bill in the face of mounting opposition from religious
groups.
"If the government pulled the reference back and redrew the proposal
to acknowledge our responsibility of recognizing same-sex couples in a civil
union, I think, for the most part, most Canadians would agree with that and
support across the country would rise dramatically."
Mike Murphy, a spokesperson for Justice Minister Martin Cauchon,
declined comment on the backbenchers' demand, expected to be made at next
week's caucus meeting in North Bay, saying "we haven't seen any suggestions
to that effect.
"The government has made the reference because we believe we've taken
the right approach, a balanced approach," he added.
Other senior strategists say the notion of asking the high court to
examine "civil unions" or registered partnerships is certain to be viewed by
the justices as a halfway measure - one specifically rejected by lower
courts.
"Some are still wondering if the courts would not allow for some
other alternative, a civil union or a separate track," said one adviser.
"But the advice we're getting is (the courts) would see this as a sort of
'separate-but-equal' arrangement which would not past muster as equality."
But at the same time, another official, who asked to remain
anonymous, conceded submitting the "civil union" concept to the court "is a
possibility" as a political move to address the issue once and for all, but
stressed the government is committed to the reference as is.
The Chrétien government asked the high court last month for an
opinion on the constitutionality of a draft bill that proposes extending
"access to marriage for civil purposes to couples of the same sex."
The proposed law specifies that "religious groups are free to refuse
to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious
beliefs."
It became clear yesterday that government strategists are also
shifting tactics. They said the job of persuading Liberals and other
Canadians to support the legislation lies not only with Chrétien and
Cauchon, but also with cabinet members and leadership heir apparent Martin.
"This is a shared burden. Mr. Martin, if he is to be the next prime
minister, has indicated that he supports it too," one strategist said.
The Chrétien government badly needs to show some momentum for its
policy because, even though the Supreme Court of Canada is likely to take up
to a year to first hear, and then decide on, the reference case, a
potentially embarrassing vote is looming within weeks when the Commons
resumes sitting in mid-September.
The Canadian Alliance intends to use one of its Opposition days in
Parliament to force a vote on a motion that repeats word-for-word a 1999
motion - unanimously supported by the Liberal government - that said
"marriage is and should remain the union of one man and one woman to the
exclusion of all others."
"Four years ago, the vote was unanimous in cabinet and caucus to
reaffirm the traditional definition," said one source.
"We're quite struck by the fact that it's now clearly a majority in
the Liberal caucus that is in favour of (redefining marriage) and this is a
pretty rapid evolution."
To boost support for the initiative, Cauchon will make a series of
speeches, starting with a major address to the Canadian Bar Association
Monday in Montreal billed as a "rallying cry."
Yesterday, EGALE, a national advocacy group for gay and lesbian
rights, denounced the idea of "civil unions" or "registered partnerships"
saying it would "send the inescapable message that the government sees us as
second-class citizens."
"Registered partnerships are no substitute for equal marriage," said
Laurie Arron, director of advocacy for EGALE.
"Imagine if the federal government prohibited interracial couples or
Jewish couples from marrying, but said we'll let you register your
partnership instead. The very idea is offensive and demeaning."
A spokesperson for Martin said yesterday he was unaware of the
backbenchers' plan to push for "civil unions." Martin, the odds-on
favourite to succeed Chrétien, supports the decision to refer the issue to
the high court "because it is helpful to clarify any legal issues associated
with this important question."
Still, it is unclear whether Martin clearly supports the draft bill
before the high court as now worded.
On July 30, Martin told reporters he is "a practising Catholic" and
recognized "there is obviously a division of opinion within the country."
"On the other hand, the courts have spoken and governments cannot
discriminate on the basis of rights. But one thing should be very clear -
no church, not my church, no temple, no mosque, no synagogue will be asked
to perform marriage in any way other than they see fit," Martin said.
Asked about the government's effort to spread around the burden of
selling gay marriages, Martin spokesperson Scott Reid said: "Dealing with
this issue is not a burden. It is a responsibility and it comes with being
an elected member of Parliament. Mr. Martin bears that responsibility along
with all of his colleagues."
Keyes said Liberal MPs are badly split over the proposed bill to
legalize gay marriages that the government has submitted for constitutional
review, and differ for the most part "because of the definition of marriage"
proposed by the government.
A civil union "would recognize the civil rights and obligations that
flow from a contractual agreement between two people," Keyes said. "A civil
union recognizes the union of two persons to the exclusion of all others -
there's the definition.
He said the term "marriage" should be left to religious institutions.
"If people want to get married and they want to go to their church to marry
and the church does not for some reason recognize gay couples getting
married, then let the church deal with it."
He said the government has already recognized gays should have full
civil rights.
Government insiders say Chrétien "had no illusions" about the
opposition mounting within caucus as he heads to next week's summer caucus
retreat in North Bay.
"He expected that it would heat up, that it was going to take a lot
of discussion and he also understands that in some cases these are deeply
held views - and this is part of the reasoning in indicating a commitment
... that it ought to ultimately be a free vote," one insider said.
Congress to consider banning gay unions, Conservatives seeking to amend U.S. Constitution
San Francisco Chronicle, August 13, 2003
901 Mission St., San Francisco, CA, 94103
(Fax: 415-896-1107 ) (E-Mail: letters@sfchronicle.com )
( http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle )
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/13/GAYS.TMP
Congress to consider banning gay unions, Conservatives seeking to amend U.S. Constitution
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Washington - Religious conservatives pledge an all-out drive to
enshrine a ban on same-sex marriage in the U.S. Constitution, calling it the
last line of defense against an inevitable court-led destruction of a
fundamental social institution.
Their Federal Marriage Amendment, after dying with no action in the
last Congress, has been reintroduced, this time with 75 House co-sponsors.
Senate hearings are scheduled for September, and the proposed amendment has
the blessing of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
Gay groups and opponents of the anti-gay marriage amendment in
Congress say they take it seriously and, privately, express considerable
alarm.
"I think you've got this panic on both sides," said an activist who
talks to religious conservatives and gay rights groups. "The groups
concerned about the gay agenda need to come up with a line in the sand that
works, and gay marriage might. The gay groups don't mind politicians being
against gay marriage, as long as it's not written into the Constitution.
They figure they can come back in 10 years when things have calmed down and
revisit it."
The Senate Republican Policy Committee, pressing for the amendment,
has argued that "no statutory solution appears to be available" against what
it describes as a legal onslaught on heterosexual marriage.
As the Rev. Lou Sheldon, head of the Traditional Values Coalition,
put it, "You can't rule a constitutional amendment unconstitutional."
Court Ruling Could Be Key
If the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules - as it could any
day - that gay couples have a right to marry in that state, the push to
amend the federal Constitution will pick up more force.
President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft have said they are
awaiting the Massachusetts court's decision to determine how to further
"codify" that legal marriage remain the union of a man and a woman.
Many read that as support for a constitutional amendment, given that
the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act already requires marriage to be between a
man and a woman for federal purposes, such as in the case of taxes and
immigration law, and authorizes states to ignore any same-sex marriages
granted by other states.
"There are two possibilities with that reference" by Bush, said Rep.
Barney Frank, D-Mass. "Either he was babbling - which I don't rule out
entirely - or he's for a constitutional amendment."
Frank and two other openly gay House members, Reps. Jim Kolbe,
R-Ariz., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., have circulated a letter to their
colleagues denouncing the amendment.
The proposed Federal Marriage Amendment would provide a single
definition of marriage for all states. It reads, "Marriage in the United
States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this
Constitution nor the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law,
shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents
thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
Amendment Faces Tough Sell
Supporters acknowledge they face a daunting task to win passage of a
constitutional amendment, which has happened only 17 times in American
history. Amending the Constitution requires approval of two-thirds of the
Senate and House and three-quarters of the state legislatures.
But advocates of the amendment contend that a Massachusetts court
decision favorable to gays, coming on the heels of Canada's recognition of
gay marriage and the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Lawrence vs. Texas
ruling, which struck down state sodomy laws in an unprecedented affirmation
of gay equality, would make the Constitution the only remaining potential
barrier to same-sex marriage.
"There's no question that this is a monumental undertaking, but on
the other hand, this is a defining moment for people of faith," Sheldon
said. "I believe this issue will be a strong rally point. You won't have a
problem getting people's attention."
The Family Research Council initially opposed a constitutional
amendment but has reconsidered in light of the Lawrence decision and the
pending Massachusetts case, as well as similar cases in New Jersey, Arizona
and Indiana.
"While it seems a very arduous way to go, we at this point endorse
all legal answers to what we consider a breakdown of the one-man, one-woman
contract that is marriage," said Connie Mackey, head of government affairs
for the Family Research Council.
Those who support the amendment "feel that there's a very short
window of time in which to move to protect marriage as the cornerstone of
raising a healthy society," Mackey said. "They feel that they're in a
position now where they're going to have to move quickly to make sure that
the courts can't overstep their bounds."
Support For '96 Marriage Act
Supporters say the overwhelming votes for the Defense of Marriage
Act, enacted in 1996 under President Clinton's signature, give them a good
shot at prevailing. DOMA, as it is known, passed the Senate 85-14, drawing
in such liberals as Sens. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,
and winning the support of 62 current senators. (California Sens. Dianne
Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats, voted against the bill.) DOMA
swept through the House 342 to 77. Both tallies are well over the
two-thirds needed for an amendment.
Many gay activists say the marriage debate has come way too early,
politically. "This is a dog issue for us," one gay activist said. "The
polls are just devastating."
Baldwin said the timing for a debate on gay marriage may not be the
best, but "we don't have that choice when we're talking the actions of a
court. We can speculate, but we don't get that choice."
For now - pending the Massachusetts decision - gay activists contend
they have nearly enough votes to stop an amendment in the House, where they
need 146, and the Senate, where they need 34.
"We have indications from roughly 30 to 32 members of the Senate, and
the numbers in the House are in the low 100s," said Winnie Stachelberg,
political director of the Human Rights Campaign, the strongest gay lobbying
force on Capitol Hill.
Frank puts the odds of the amendment's passage as "very slender."
To Sheldon's predictions of success, Frank retorted, "Are you in the
habit of paying attention to that fool? I'm not. That's on the record."
Frank noted that DOMA passed in part on states' rights grounds: It
allows a state not to recognize gay marriages from another state. A
constitutional amendment forcing states not to recognize gay marriage, by
contrast, "is a total flip," he said, noting the Vice President Dick Cheney
argued during the 2000 campaign that marriage should remain a state domain.
Conservatives who have long warned that the federal government has
too much power over the states find a constitutional amendment depriving
states of one of their most long-standing jurisdictions - marriage laws -
highly unpalatable. Even a chief DOMA sponsor, former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga.,
has said he opposes a constitutional amendment on those grounds.
Roger Pilon, vice president for legal affairs at the libertarian Cato
Institute, said the problem with the amendment is that "it defines marriage
for the entire country, which I find inconsistent with the federalism
principle at the core of the Constitution. Family law has always been a
state issue, not a federal issue."
Pilon compared the gay marriage amendment to attempts to use the
Constitution to ban flag burning and protect victims' rights. "The
Constitution divides power between the federal and state governments for the
purpose of pitting power against power so that no one locus of power becomes
oppressive," he said. "It's probably the most fundamental principle in our
political structure."
But, he said, "Sometimes family values trump constitutional values
for conservatives."
. E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com
901 Mission St., San Francisco, CA, 94103
(Fax: 415-896-1107 ) (E-Mail: letters@sfchronicle.com )
( http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle )
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/13/GAYS.TMP
Congress to consider banning gay unions, Conservatives seeking to amend U.S. Constitution
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Washington - Religious conservatives pledge an all-out drive to
enshrine a ban on same-sex marriage in the U.S. Constitution, calling it the
last line of defense against an inevitable court-led destruction of a
fundamental social institution.
Their Federal Marriage Amendment, after dying with no action in the
last Congress, has been reintroduced, this time with 75 House co-sponsors.
Senate hearings are scheduled for September, and the proposed amendment has
the blessing of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
Gay groups and opponents of the anti-gay marriage amendment in
Congress say they take it seriously and, privately, express considerable
alarm.
"I think you've got this panic on both sides," said an activist who
talks to religious conservatives and gay rights groups. "The groups
concerned about the gay agenda need to come up with a line in the sand that
works, and gay marriage might. The gay groups don't mind politicians being
against gay marriage, as long as it's not written into the Constitution.
They figure they can come back in 10 years when things have calmed down and
revisit it."
The Senate Republican Policy Committee, pressing for the amendment,
has argued that "no statutory solution appears to be available" against what
it describes as a legal onslaught on heterosexual marriage.
As the Rev. Lou Sheldon, head of the Traditional Values Coalition,
put it, "You can't rule a constitutional amendment unconstitutional."
Court Ruling Could Be Key
If the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules - as it could any
day - that gay couples have a right to marry in that state, the push to
amend the federal Constitution will pick up more force.
President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft have said they are
awaiting the Massachusetts court's decision to determine how to further
"codify" that legal marriage remain the union of a man and a woman.
Many read that as support for a constitutional amendment, given that
the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act already requires marriage to be between a
man and a woman for federal purposes, such as in the case of taxes and
immigration law, and authorizes states to ignore any same-sex marriages
granted by other states.
"There are two possibilities with that reference" by Bush, said Rep.
Barney Frank, D-Mass. "Either he was babbling - which I don't rule out
entirely - or he's for a constitutional amendment."
Frank and two other openly gay House members, Reps. Jim Kolbe,
R-Ariz., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., have circulated a letter to their
colleagues denouncing the amendment.
The proposed Federal Marriage Amendment would provide a single
definition of marriage for all states. It reads, "Marriage in the United
States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this
Constitution nor the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law,
shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents
thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
Amendment Faces Tough Sell
Supporters acknowledge they face a daunting task to win passage of a
constitutional amendment, which has happened only 17 times in American
history. Amending the Constitution requires approval of two-thirds of the
Senate and House and three-quarters of the state legislatures.
But advocates of the amendment contend that a Massachusetts court
decision favorable to gays, coming on the heels of Canada's recognition of
gay marriage and the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Lawrence vs. Texas
ruling, which struck down state sodomy laws in an unprecedented affirmation
of gay equality, would make the Constitution the only remaining potential
barrier to same-sex marriage.
"There's no question that this is a monumental undertaking, but on
the other hand, this is a defining moment for people of faith," Sheldon
said. "I believe this issue will be a strong rally point. You won't have a
problem getting people's attention."
The Family Research Council initially opposed a constitutional
amendment but has reconsidered in light of the Lawrence decision and the
pending Massachusetts case, as well as similar cases in New Jersey, Arizona
and Indiana.
"While it seems a very arduous way to go, we at this point endorse
all legal answers to what we consider a breakdown of the one-man, one-woman
contract that is marriage," said Connie Mackey, head of government affairs
for the Family Research Council.
Those who support the amendment "feel that there's a very short
window of time in which to move to protect marriage as the cornerstone of
raising a healthy society," Mackey said. "They feel that they're in a
position now where they're going to have to move quickly to make sure that
the courts can't overstep their bounds."
Support For '96 Marriage Act
Supporters say the overwhelming votes for the Defense of Marriage
Act, enacted in 1996 under President Clinton's signature, give them a good
shot at prevailing. DOMA, as it is known, passed the Senate 85-14, drawing
in such liberals as Sens. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,
and winning the support of 62 current senators. (California Sens. Dianne
Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats, voted against the bill.) DOMA
swept through the House 342 to 77. Both tallies are well over the
two-thirds needed for an amendment.
Many gay activists say the marriage debate has come way too early,
politically. "This is a dog issue for us," one gay activist said. "The
polls are just devastating."
Baldwin said the timing for a debate on gay marriage may not be the
best, but "we don't have that choice when we're talking the actions of a
court. We can speculate, but we don't get that choice."
For now - pending the Massachusetts decision - gay activists contend
they have nearly enough votes to stop an amendment in the House, where they
need 146, and the Senate, where they need 34.
"We have indications from roughly 30 to 32 members of the Senate, and
the numbers in the House are in the low 100s," said Winnie Stachelberg,
political director of the Human Rights Campaign, the strongest gay lobbying
force on Capitol Hill.
Frank puts the odds of the amendment's passage as "very slender."
To Sheldon's predictions of success, Frank retorted, "Are you in the
habit of paying attention to that fool? I'm not. That's on the record."
Frank noted that DOMA passed in part on states' rights grounds: It
allows a state not to recognize gay marriages from another state. A
constitutional amendment forcing states not to recognize gay marriage, by
contrast, "is a total flip," he said, noting the Vice President Dick Cheney
argued during the 2000 campaign that marriage should remain a state domain.
Conservatives who have long warned that the federal government has
too much power over the states find a constitutional amendment depriving
states of one of their most long-standing jurisdictions - marriage laws -
highly unpalatable. Even a chief DOMA sponsor, former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga.,
has said he opposes a constitutional amendment on those grounds.
Roger Pilon, vice president for legal affairs at the libertarian Cato
Institute, said the problem with the amendment is that "it defines marriage
for the entire country, which I find inconsistent with the federalism
principle at the core of the Constitution. Family law has always been a
state issue, not a federal issue."
Pilon compared the gay marriage amendment to attempts to use the
Constitution to ban flag burning and protect victims' rights. "The
Constitution divides power between the federal and state governments for the
purpose of pitting power against power so that no one locus of power becomes
oppressive," he said. "It's probably the most fundamental principle in our
political structure."
But, he said, "Sometimes family values trump constitutional values
for conservatives."
. E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com
ABA: gay adoptions OK, Gay Marriage: Playing with Political Fire, Transgender Teens Honored At Vigil
1. KNOXVILLE NEWS-SENTINEL (Tennessee) Episcopalians at all levels are
sorting out vote on gay bishop
2. 365GAY.COM "Ex-Gays" Accuse Teachers Union Of Discrimination
3. BUSINESS WEEK Gay Marriage: Playing with Political Fire
4. ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION Gay groups criticize billboard firm for
refusing ads
5. NBC4 (Washington, DC) Transgender Teens Honored At Vigil; Last Year's
Double-Homicide Remains Unsolved
6. THE HAWAII CHANNEL Groups Prepare For Same-Sex Marriage Battle; Fight
Spurred By Court Rulings
7. ASSOCIATED PRESS American Bar Association approves a recommendation
that states and courts allow same-sex partners to adopt children together
Knoxville News-Sentinel, August 12, 2003
Box 59038, Knoxville, TN, 37950-9038
(Fax: 423-521-8124 ) (E-Mail: letters@knews.com )
( http://www.knoxnews.com/ )
http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/state/article/0,1406,KNS_348_2175517,00.html
Episcopalians at all levels sorting out vote on gay bishop
By Associated Press
MEMPHIS - The bishop of the West Tennessee diocese of the Episcopal
Church apologized to gay congregants Sunday in Memphis, while the former
archbishop of Canterbury urged Nashville worshippers to keep God as the
goal.
The Episcopal Church has been scrutinized after voting during their
contentious convention last week to let openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson
lead the New Hampshire Diocese.
"I didn't agree with the decision, but I didn't intend to reject
you," Bishop Don Johnson told Episcopalians from across West Tennessee who
gathered at Grace-St. Luke's Church.
Johnson was one of 43 bishops who opposed Robinson's election.
"We weren't ready to go there," Johnson said as tears rolled down his
cheeks. "God loves every one of us. We're all broken. We're all sinners.
Ours is a church big enough to love all of God's children."
Johnson said he voted against Robinson's election because "the church
has not done the theological study needed for this momentous occasion, and
the commitment to the worldwide Anglican Communion will be strained."
Most attending preferred not to comment about Johnson's speech or
Robinson's election, saying they hadn't yet formed an opinion or did not
feel comfortable voicing their opinion. Those who did comment expressed
pride in their church.
Meanwhile, George Carey, the retired archbishop of Canterbury who led
the world's 77 million Anglicans for 11 years, preached at Christ Church
Cathedral in Nashville.
Carey told parishioners that "the kingdom of God is far greater than
the church ... direct your energies there."
Carey, whose sermon focused mainly on the theme of renewal, led the
Anglican Communion until last year.
He warned that people should be wary of settling in a faith that
makes no demands and does nothing extraordinary.
Carey said the church would sometimes disappoint, but that since it
is led by the Holy Spirit, it would neither go completely off track nor
cease to be a light that shines.
"It was a message of hope," said Ellen Clayton, a member of the
Cathedral. "His message is that the church is dynamic. As it responds to
the way society changes, it can be painful but it will survive."
365Gay.com, August 12, 2003
http://www.365gay.com/NewsContent/081203exGaySuit.htm
Ex-Gays Accuse Teachers Union Of Discrimination
by Doreen Brandt, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Washington Bureau
Washington, D.C. - A group representing people who claim to have been
"cured" of homosexuality has filed a discrimination complaint with the
District of Columbia Office of Human Rights alleging it was discriminated
against by the country's largest teachers union.
Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, or PFOX, accuses the
National Education Association of refusing to let it to set up booths at the
association's last two annual conventions.
"They most definitely are discriminating," said Regina Griggs,
executive director of PFOX. "They will not allow another voice. They
literally have silenced ex-gay schoolteachers and members of their own
unions, as well as our organization."
The group says it was initially promised space at the NEA 2002 and
2003 conventions but at the last minute the association reneged.
Riggs said the booths were designed to "promote tolerance for people
who renounced homosexuality and provide teachers with material to provide
young people who may be questioning their sexuality."
Both conventions had booths for gay teachers Griggs said.
The NEA, which represents 2.7 million teachers says as a private
organization it has the right to decide who can exhibit at their
conventions.
Business Week, August 25, 2003
1221 Avenue of the Americas, 39th Floor, New York, NY 10020
(Fax: 212-512-6458)
(Online Mailer: http://www.businessweek.com/letters/respond.htm )
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_34/c3846051_mz013.htm
Washington Outlook
Gay Marriage: Playing with Political Fire
By Lorraine Woellert
When President George W. Bush took a strong stand against gay
marriage at a July 30 news conference, there seemed to be no political
downside. "Marriage is between a man and a woman," Bush said. "I think we
ought to codify that one way or the other." Millions of social
conservatives applauded. And GOP strategists were gleeful at a chance to
force Democrats to confront an uncomfortable issue.
But opposing gay marriage is the easy part. As gay rights issues
bubble up in courts and state legislatures, polls reflect an ambivalence in
the nation that puts both parties in a bind. That means Bush may be forced
to juggle compassion and conservatism to satisfy his base without igniting a
culture war that alienates the center. And Democrats and gay activists must
take equal care not to overreach. "The American public wants to be tolerant
on this issue, but they don't want to be pushed into feeling like they
endorse the lifestyle," GOP pollster Edward Goeas says.
When the Supreme Court overturned a Texas ban on sodomy in June,
polls showed a building backlash against homosexuality. But more
corporations are extending benefits to partners of gay employees, and gays
are an ever-growing presence in pop culture - witness Bravo network's
surprise summer hit, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.
Certainly gay marriage is an issue that won't go away.
Massachusetts' highest court could decide any day whether a law banning
same-sex marriages amounts to discrimination. A ruling against the state
would set off a wave of similar lawsuits across the country. "Gay marriage
has descended on us like a freight train," says Sandy Rios, president of
Concerned Women for America, a conservative coalition.
Bush strategists think they can ride that train without endangering
votes in the center. So far, the President has punted on a constitutional
amendment banning gay unions and remains mum on "civil unions" - state laws
giving gay couples many of the same rights as married heterosexuals.
"Politically he's playing it very well," says Patrick Basham, senior fellow
at the libertarian Cato Institute.
"He's against gay marriage, which keeps the base with him and helps
with turnout, but he also emphasizes that one should be tolerant of that
lifestyle, so he doesn't alienate the moderate, suburban female voter."
Vice-President Dick Cheney, who has a lesbian daughter, said of civil
unions during the 2000 campaign: "We live in a free society, and freedom
means freedom for everybody. I don't think there should necessarily be a
federal policy in this area." But the Right is clamoring for action, and
the White House has reason to pay attention. An estimated 4 million to 6
million evangelical voters stayed home on Election Day, 2000, and Bush can't
risk losing them again in 2004.
Conservatives want to go beyond the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act
signed by President Bill Clinton, which defined marriage for federal
purposes as the union of heterosexuals. The constitutional ban that the
Right wants Bush to endorse would even override any state laws that allow
civil unions - such as the one Democratic Presidential candidate Howard Dean
signed as Vermont's governor. Bush "has to oppose anything that tries to
counterfeit marriage," says Genevieve Wood of the conservative Family
Research Council.
If Bush goes further than he has and the Democrats can't rein in
radical elements, the result could be a polarizing debate. Says Winnie
Stachelberg, political director of the gay and lesbian Human Rights
Campaign: "If either political party attempts to make a wedge issue out of
this, it will backfire." Maybe. But with passions running high and
Americans so conflicted, don't count on caution.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 12, 2003
72 Marietta Street NW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
(Fax: 404-526-5746 ) (E-Mail: journal@ajc.com )
( http://www.accessatlanta.com )
http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/0803/12billboard.html
Gay groups criticize billboard firm for refusing ads
By Bill Torpy, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
An Atlanta-based billboard company is being criticized after turning
down a gay youth support group's request to rent signs saying "It's okay to
be gay."
A Charlotte organization, Time Out Youth, wanted to rent five signs
there for a month to coincide with back-to-school, a time when organizers
say gay youths are often taunted by fellow students. The signs were to have
listed the group's Web site, TimeOutYouth.org, along with the slogan.
But executives at Adams Outdoor Advertising nixed the idea, saying
the message would offend some people.
Adams officials would not comment Monday, saying they would issue a
statement later. But R. Joe Applegate Jr., general manager of Adams'
Charlotte office, told The Charlotte Observer: "Because it's targeted to
kids, this would be very, very offensive to parents of those children. It's
a message that sounds encouraging."
Tonda Taylor, director of Time Out Youth, said the group is not
encouraging or "recruiting" youths to become gay. She said they already
have feelings and are looking for support, which they are not getting in
schools or churches. "We resorted to billboard ads because they're an
effective way to let kids know we're here," she said.
Taylor said her group was caught off-guard by the company's decision
in July because Adams rented billboard space to Time Out Youth in 2001.
That campaign showed four young people and said, "We are your gay youth."
She said that campaign brought an increase in calls to the organization and
created little controversy.
This time, Adams representatives suggested other slogans, like, "Be
who you are," "Friends that know what you're feeling," and "Life is good!
Everything will be OK!"
None of the suggested ads had the word "gay," said Taylor, who
declined the compromises because they seemed "vague or just silly."
"There was no way a gay youth would know this was an affirming, safe
place to come," she said.
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation said it is infrequent
for such messages to be denied circulation.
Chalee Snorton, the alliance's media manager for the Southeast, said
the group is encouraging supporters to pressure Adams to change its
decision.
NBC4 (Washington, DC), August 12, 2003
http://www.nbc4.com/news/2401055/detail.html
Transgender Teens Honored At Vigil
Last Year's Double-Homicide Remains Unsolved
WASHINGTON - A memorial was held Tuesday night for two transgender
teens who were found shot to death in their car in Southeast D.C. last year.
Wilbur Thomas, 19, who was known as Stephanie, and Dion Davis, 18,
who went by the name Ukea, were found in car at 50th and C streets in
Southeast.
The case remains unsolved, which has sparked criticism among the gay
and transgender community. However, police say they are still working to
solve the case.
"Since the double homicide, we've increased the reward money, now
$50,000 for this particular case since we had two victims. We've got leads.
It's still a pretty hot case in terms of being able to be solved, but we
still need witnesses to come forward so that we have sufficient probable
cause to be able to get a warrant in this case," Police Chief Charles Ramsey
said.
In addition to the vigil Tuesday, community leaders gave away
backpacks and school supplies in honor of the teens.
The Hawaii Channel, August 12, 2003
http://www.thehawaiichannel.com/news/2381289/detail.html
Groups Prepare For Same-Sex Marriage Battle
Fight Spurred By Court Rulings
HONOLULU - The debate in Hawaii over same-sex marriage is heating up
again. People on both sides of the issue are beginning to mobilize their
forces.
The move is in response to what is happening nationally and
internationally.
Same sex-marriage was recently legalized in Canada. The
Massachusetts Supreme Court is close to ruling on the issue itself.
Some say it is just a matter of time before Hawaii's Constitutional
amendment banning same-sex marriage is challenged in the court.
"We want to be ready and we are ready to stand up and stand for
traditional marriage," said Mike Gabbard of the Alliance for Traditional
Marriage and Values.
Gabbard, who is also a councilman, said he is keeping a close eye on
the Massachusetts ruling on same sex marriage.
"They've already got the 49 same sex couples lined up to challenge
the states, and that's what we're looking at," Gabbard said.
In 1998, Hawaii passed a Constitutional amendment banning same-sex
marriage. It was backed by 70 percent of the people who voted. With these
latest developments, Gabbard said his group is gearing up for a fight.
"We've been meeting on extensive meetings on developing a plan so
wanted to assure those that are involved with that 70 percent that we've got
a plan to go," Gabbard said.
"I think it's very disturbing that they are going to bring a lot of
pain and a lot of wounding and a lot of division back to this state that
happened several years ago," said Rev. Vaughn F. Beckman of the Interfaith
Alliance.
Beckman is president of a diverse group of religious organizations
and people that supports legalizing same-sex marriage.
"This will only energize us all the more to say we've got to do
something to protect the diversity of the people in this state," Beckman
said.
Just recently, two Big Island men were married in Canada. They said
they will soon be challenging Hawaii's same-sex marriage ban.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
ABA Urges Changes in Military Tribunals (excerpt)
By Anne Gearan
. . . In other votes Tuesday, ABA delegates: . . .
Easily approved a recommendation that states and courts allow gay
partners and unmarried heterosexual couples to adopt children together.
About half the states have allowed such adoptions, which give both parents
legal rights and allow children to qualify for inheritance and other
benefits from both parents.
The adoption recommendation did not address whether gay people should
be eligible to marry. The ABA is already on record supporting the right of
gay people to adopt.
sorting out vote on gay bishop
2. 365GAY.COM "Ex-Gays" Accuse Teachers Union Of Discrimination
3. BUSINESS WEEK Gay Marriage: Playing with Political Fire
4. ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION Gay groups criticize billboard firm for
refusing ads
5. NBC4 (Washington, DC) Transgender Teens Honored At Vigil; Last Year's
Double-Homicide Remains Unsolved
6. THE HAWAII CHANNEL Groups Prepare For Same-Sex Marriage Battle; Fight
Spurred By Court Rulings
7. ASSOCIATED PRESS American Bar Association approves a recommendation
that states and courts allow same-sex partners to adopt children together
Knoxville News-Sentinel, August 12, 2003
Box 59038, Knoxville, TN, 37950-9038
(Fax: 423-521-8124 ) (E-Mail: letters@knews.com )
( http://www.knoxnews.com/ )
http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/state/article/0,1406,KNS_348_2175517,00.html
Episcopalians at all levels sorting out vote on gay bishop
By Associated Press
MEMPHIS - The bishop of the West Tennessee diocese of the Episcopal
Church apologized to gay congregants Sunday in Memphis, while the former
archbishop of Canterbury urged Nashville worshippers to keep God as the
goal.
The Episcopal Church has been scrutinized after voting during their
contentious convention last week to let openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson
lead the New Hampshire Diocese.
"I didn't agree with the decision, but I didn't intend to reject
you," Bishop Don Johnson told Episcopalians from across West Tennessee who
gathered at Grace-St. Luke's Church.
Johnson was one of 43 bishops who opposed Robinson's election.
"We weren't ready to go there," Johnson said as tears rolled down his
cheeks. "God loves every one of us. We're all broken. We're all sinners.
Ours is a church big enough to love all of God's children."
Johnson said he voted against Robinson's election because "the church
has not done the theological study needed for this momentous occasion, and
the commitment to the worldwide Anglican Communion will be strained."
Most attending preferred not to comment about Johnson's speech or
Robinson's election, saying they hadn't yet formed an opinion or did not
feel comfortable voicing their opinion. Those who did comment expressed
pride in their church.
Meanwhile, George Carey, the retired archbishop of Canterbury who led
the world's 77 million Anglicans for 11 years, preached at Christ Church
Cathedral in Nashville.
Carey told parishioners that "the kingdom of God is far greater than
the church ... direct your energies there."
Carey, whose sermon focused mainly on the theme of renewal, led the
Anglican Communion until last year.
He warned that people should be wary of settling in a faith that
makes no demands and does nothing extraordinary.
Carey said the church would sometimes disappoint, but that since it
is led by the Holy Spirit, it would neither go completely off track nor
cease to be a light that shines.
"It was a message of hope," said Ellen Clayton, a member of the
Cathedral. "His message is that the church is dynamic. As it responds to
the way society changes, it can be painful but it will survive."
365Gay.com, August 12, 2003
http://www.365gay.com/NewsContent/081203exGaySuit.htm
Ex-Gays Accuse Teachers Union Of Discrimination
by Doreen Brandt, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Washington Bureau
Washington, D.C. - A group representing people who claim to have been
"cured" of homosexuality has filed a discrimination complaint with the
District of Columbia Office of Human Rights alleging it was discriminated
against by the country's largest teachers union.
Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, or PFOX, accuses the
National Education Association of refusing to let it to set up booths at the
association's last two annual conventions.
"They most definitely are discriminating," said Regina Griggs,
executive director of PFOX. "They will not allow another voice. They
literally have silenced ex-gay schoolteachers and members of their own
unions, as well as our organization."
The group says it was initially promised space at the NEA 2002 and
2003 conventions but at the last minute the association reneged.
Riggs said the booths were designed to "promote tolerance for people
who renounced homosexuality and provide teachers with material to provide
young people who may be questioning their sexuality."
Both conventions had booths for gay teachers Griggs said.
The NEA, which represents 2.7 million teachers says as a private
organization it has the right to decide who can exhibit at their
conventions.
Business Week, August 25, 2003
1221 Avenue of the Americas, 39th Floor, New York, NY 10020
(Fax: 212-512-6458)
(Online Mailer: http://www.businessweek.com/letters/respond.htm )
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_34/c3846051_mz013.htm
Washington Outlook
Gay Marriage: Playing with Political Fire
By Lorraine Woellert
When President George W. Bush took a strong stand against gay
marriage at a July 30 news conference, there seemed to be no political
downside. "Marriage is between a man and a woman," Bush said. "I think we
ought to codify that one way or the other." Millions of social
conservatives applauded. And GOP strategists were gleeful at a chance to
force Democrats to confront an uncomfortable issue.
But opposing gay marriage is the easy part. As gay rights issues
bubble up in courts and state legislatures, polls reflect an ambivalence in
the nation that puts both parties in a bind. That means Bush may be forced
to juggle compassion and conservatism to satisfy his base without igniting a
culture war that alienates the center. And Democrats and gay activists must
take equal care not to overreach. "The American public wants to be tolerant
on this issue, but they don't want to be pushed into feeling like they
endorse the lifestyle," GOP pollster Edward Goeas says.
When the Supreme Court overturned a Texas ban on sodomy in June,
polls showed a building backlash against homosexuality. But more
corporations are extending benefits to partners of gay employees, and gays
are an ever-growing presence in pop culture - witness Bravo network's
surprise summer hit, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.
Certainly gay marriage is an issue that won't go away.
Massachusetts' highest court could decide any day whether a law banning
same-sex marriages amounts to discrimination. A ruling against the state
would set off a wave of similar lawsuits across the country. "Gay marriage
has descended on us like a freight train," says Sandy Rios, president of
Concerned Women for America, a conservative coalition.
Bush strategists think they can ride that train without endangering
votes in the center. So far, the President has punted on a constitutional
amendment banning gay unions and remains mum on "civil unions" - state laws
giving gay couples many of the same rights as married heterosexuals.
"Politically he's playing it very well," says Patrick Basham, senior fellow
at the libertarian Cato Institute.
"He's against gay marriage, which keeps the base with him and helps
with turnout, but he also emphasizes that one should be tolerant of that
lifestyle, so he doesn't alienate the moderate, suburban female voter."
Vice-President Dick Cheney, who has a lesbian daughter, said of civil
unions during the 2000 campaign: "We live in a free society, and freedom
means freedom for everybody. I don't think there should necessarily be a
federal policy in this area." But the Right is clamoring for action, and
the White House has reason to pay attention. An estimated 4 million to 6
million evangelical voters stayed home on Election Day, 2000, and Bush can't
risk losing them again in 2004.
Conservatives want to go beyond the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act
signed by President Bill Clinton, which defined marriage for federal
purposes as the union of heterosexuals. The constitutional ban that the
Right wants Bush to endorse would even override any state laws that allow
civil unions - such as the one Democratic Presidential candidate Howard Dean
signed as Vermont's governor. Bush "has to oppose anything that tries to
counterfeit marriage," says Genevieve Wood of the conservative Family
Research Council.
If Bush goes further than he has and the Democrats can't rein in
radical elements, the result could be a polarizing debate. Says Winnie
Stachelberg, political director of the gay and lesbian Human Rights
Campaign: "If either political party attempts to make a wedge issue out of
this, it will backfire." Maybe. But with passions running high and
Americans so conflicted, don't count on caution.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 12, 2003
72 Marietta Street NW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
(Fax: 404-526-5746 ) (E-Mail: journal@ajc.com )
( http://www.accessatlanta.com )
http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/0803/12billboard.html
Gay groups criticize billboard firm for refusing ads
By Bill Torpy, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
An Atlanta-based billboard company is being criticized after turning
down a gay youth support group's request to rent signs saying "It's okay to
be gay."
A Charlotte organization, Time Out Youth, wanted to rent five signs
there for a month to coincide with back-to-school, a time when organizers
say gay youths are often taunted by fellow students. The signs were to have
listed the group's Web site, TimeOutYouth.org, along with the slogan.
But executives at Adams Outdoor Advertising nixed the idea, saying
the message would offend some people.
Adams officials would not comment Monday, saying they would issue a
statement later. But R. Joe Applegate Jr., general manager of Adams'
Charlotte office, told The Charlotte Observer: "Because it's targeted to
kids, this would be very, very offensive to parents of those children. It's
a message that sounds encouraging."
Tonda Taylor, director of Time Out Youth, said the group is not
encouraging or "recruiting" youths to become gay. She said they already
have feelings and are looking for support, which they are not getting in
schools or churches. "We resorted to billboard ads because they're an
effective way to let kids know we're here," she said.
Taylor said her group was caught off-guard by the company's decision
in July because Adams rented billboard space to Time Out Youth in 2001.
That campaign showed four young people and said, "We are your gay youth."
She said that campaign brought an increase in calls to the organization and
created little controversy.
This time, Adams representatives suggested other slogans, like, "Be
who you are," "Friends that know what you're feeling," and "Life is good!
Everything will be OK!"
None of the suggested ads had the word "gay," said Taylor, who
declined the compromises because they seemed "vague or just silly."
"There was no way a gay youth would know this was an affirming, safe
place to come," she said.
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation said it is infrequent
for such messages to be denied circulation.
Chalee Snorton, the alliance's media manager for the Southeast, said
the group is encouraging supporters to pressure Adams to change its
decision.
NBC4 (Washington, DC), August 12, 2003
http://www.nbc4.com/news/2401055/detail.html
Transgender Teens Honored At Vigil
Last Year's Double-Homicide Remains Unsolved
WASHINGTON - A memorial was held Tuesday night for two transgender
teens who were found shot to death in their car in Southeast D.C. last year.
Wilbur Thomas, 19, who was known as Stephanie, and Dion Davis, 18,
who went by the name Ukea, were found in car at 50th and C streets in
Southeast.
The case remains unsolved, which has sparked criticism among the gay
and transgender community. However, police say they are still working to
solve the case.
"Since the double homicide, we've increased the reward money, now
$50,000 for this particular case since we had two victims. We've got leads.
It's still a pretty hot case in terms of being able to be solved, but we
still need witnesses to come forward so that we have sufficient probable
cause to be able to get a warrant in this case," Police Chief Charles Ramsey
said.
In addition to the vigil Tuesday, community leaders gave away
backpacks and school supplies in honor of the teens.
The Hawaii Channel, August 12, 2003
http://www.thehawaiichannel.com/news/2381289/detail.html
Groups Prepare For Same-Sex Marriage Battle
Fight Spurred By Court Rulings
HONOLULU - The debate in Hawaii over same-sex marriage is heating up
again. People on both sides of the issue are beginning to mobilize their
forces.
The move is in response to what is happening nationally and
internationally.
Same sex-marriage was recently legalized in Canada. The
Massachusetts Supreme Court is close to ruling on the issue itself.
Some say it is just a matter of time before Hawaii's Constitutional
amendment banning same-sex marriage is challenged in the court.
"We want to be ready and we are ready to stand up and stand for
traditional marriage," said Mike Gabbard of the Alliance for Traditional
Marriage and Values.
Gabbard, who is also a councilman, said he is keeping a close eye on
the Massachusetts ruling on same sex marriage.
"They've already got the 49 same sex couples lined up to challenge
the states, and that's what we're looking at," Gabbard said.
In 1998, Hawaii passed a Constitutional amendment banning same-sex
marriage. It was backed by 70 percent of the people who voted. With these
latest developments, Gabbard said his group is gearing up for a fight.
"We've been meeting on extensive meetings on developing a plan so
wanted to assure those that are involved with that 70 percent that we've got
a plan to go," Gabbard said.
"I think it's very disturbing that they are going to bring a lot of
pain and a lot of wounding and a lot of division back to this state that
happened several years ago," said Rev. Vaughn F. Beckman of the Interfaith
Alliance.
Beckman is president of a diverse group of religious organizations
and people that supports legalizing same-sex marriage.
"This will only energize us all the more to say we've got to do
something to protect the diversity of the people in this state," Beckman
said.
Just recently, two Big Island men were married in Canada. They said
they will soon be challenging Hawaii's same-sex marriage ban.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
ABA Urges Changes in Military Tribunals (excerpt)
By Anne Gearan
. . . In other votes Tuesday, ABA delegates: . . .
Easily approved a recommendation that states and courts allow gay
partners and unmarried heterosexual couples to adopt children together.
About half the states have allowed such adoptions, which give both parents
legal rights and allow children to qualify for inheritance and other
benefits from both parents.
The adoption recommendation did not address whether gay people should
be eligible to marry. The ABA is already on record supporting the right of
gay people to adopt.
A Queer Summer for Gays, Lutherans (Try To) Avoid Controversy Over Gay Sex, Where's the harm in gay marriage?
1. NEWSWEEK (Web Exclusive) A Queer Summer for Gays: It's been an
exceptionally friendly couple months for gays. Still, the president and the
Pope both object to same-sex marriage.
2. ASSOCIATED PRESS TV Boasts a Summer of Guys and Gays
3. ASSOCIATED PRESS Lutherans (Try To) Avoid Controversy Over Gay Sex
4. NATIONAL POST (Canada) Andrew Coyne: Where's the harm in gay marriage?
Newsweek (Web Exclusive), August 11, 2003
251 West 57th Street, New York, NY, 10019
(Fax: 212-445-4120 ) (EMAIL: letters@newsweek.com )
( http://www.newsweek.com )
http://www.msnbc.com/news/951035.asp
A Queer Summer for Gays
It's been an exceptionally friendly couple months for gays. Still, the
president and the Pope both object to same-sex marriage. Our columnist
explores the culture clash
Gersh Kuntzman, Newsweek Web Exclusive
If you were watching America from somewhere in a low orbit for the
past few months, you'd think we were the most gay-friendly country on Earth.
Consider all that has happened recently:
The Supreme Court ruled that states couldn't make gay sex illegal.
New York City is setting up a full-fledged high school for gay students (to
prevent abuse of homosexual teens, city officials said, not to give a select
group of students a way to honor the Supreme Court ruling). The openly
conservative New York Post put a gay couple on the front page - and
applauded their union - after they got married in Toronto. A major church
made history by electing its first gay (or at least openly gay) bishop. One
of the final three couples on "The Amazing Race" is a gay team, Chip and
Reichen, who met, lest we forget, while Reichen was in the Air Force! (And,
of the three teams left, America has made them the "most popular" on the CBS
Web site. Forget popularity, they deserve to win. They're so ...
together.) And, finally, one of the most popular shows on television right
now is "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," a show that posits that "straight"
men are so inept socially, stylistically and culturally that they need a
team of gay men to make them over.
So, given all that's happened, one has to wonder, is this a gay, er,
I mean, great country, or what?
But how widely accepted is the gay lifestyle? This week, loudmouthed
Giants wide-receiver Jeremy Shockey became embroiled in controversy when he
called one of the team's former coaches a "homo." Not only was Shockey's
use of the epithet immediately attacked, but he apologized by proclaiming
that he doesn't consider the word "homo" an epithet at all. There you have
it, folks, final evidence of how far gays have come in our society: when
straight guys call other straight guys gay, it's not an insult - it's a
compliment!
Besides, a poll last year showed that 32 percent of Americans said
that gay sex is not wrong "at all." Since only 5 to 10 percent of the
population is gay, well, you do the math.
Of course, there are still those among us fighting the homofication
of America. One of them is George W. Bush, who made an extraordinary
comment the other day when a reporter asked him about homosexuality: "Mr.
President . As someone who has spoken out in strongly moral terms, what's
your view on homosexuality?" The answer tried to please so many
constituencies that it sounded like the president was channeling our old
friend Bill "Definition of 'Is'" Clinton:
"Yeah, I am mindful that we're all sinners," he began. "And I
caution those who may try to take the speck out of the neighbor's eye when
they got a log in their own. I think it is important for our society to
respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a
welcoming country. On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like
me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage. [I'm sorry, but was he
asked about marriage?] That's really where the issue is headed here in
Washington. And that is the definition of marriage. I believe marriage is
between a man and a woman and I believe we ought to codify that one way or
the other and we have lawyers looking at the best way to do that."
Indeed, classic Bush. In one sentence, he both urged compassion and
respect for gay Americans and yet also vowed to make their lives as
difficult as the law will allow - and tougher still if his lawyers figure
out a way.
Of course, my favorite news story of the week was Pope John Paul II's
announcement that he also objects to gay marriage. Now there was a
surprise. You know, I hate to refer to such mundane reference materials as
the calendar, but it's 2003, not 1553. The Catholic Church does many good
things in our society - I can't name one right now, but I'm sure there's
something - but providing qualified sex or marriage counseling is not one of
them. Who gave priests - who are supposed to be celibate and spouse-less -
such a strong role over such institutions anyway? Indeed, if we believe the
official line, the Pope hasn't had sex since he was a ski-bum actor named
Karol Wojtyla - and that was 60 years ago in Nazi-occupied Poland. Things
have changed a little since gays were being gassed by Hitler, Pontiff.
The Vatican's 12-page, succinctly titled document, "Considerations
Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition of Unions Between Homosexual
Persons," predictably argued against equal rights for gays. But it also
added that gay adoption does "violence" to children. If someone can show me
crime statistics showing that gay parents abuse their kids at a higher rate
than straight parents, I'll gladly praise the Pope's valiant stance. Until
then, John Paul should stick to his holy rituals, not spewing factless
theocratic propaganda.
Such Taliban-like decrees have no place in American political life.
True, most Americans believe that marriage is fundamentally a religious
institution. But that view, like the Vatican's, is incompatible with the
role marriage plays in our civic life. Cities, states and the federal
government use marriage as a way of deciding who gets spousal death,
retirement and health benefits. If the separation of Church and State is to
mean anything at all, only people who marry in a civil ceremony should be
eligible for such public benefits. Churches, synagogues, mosques and
temples should have no supervisory role.
In New York City, as in some other localities, people are allowed to
register as domestic partners-ensuring that "spouses" get city benefits.
Nearly 20,000 people - 70 percent of whom are estimated to be
homosexuals-are registered. The Union has, apparently, survived.
The principal objection that anti-gay Americans and clergymen have to
homosexuality seems to be the fact that homosexuals have gay sex, but I
think there are larger issues at work. Perhaps what bothers America most
about gays is the increasing evidence - which is the basis for "Queer Eye"
in the first place - that the world would be better if gays were running it.
No more bad hair days. No more tasteless presidential suits. No more
foreign policy machismo. Plenty of all night parties at clubs on Eighth
Avenue in Manhattan and in West Hollywood filled with thong-wearing men and
fishnet-wearing women (or vice-versa). Lots of witty bons-mots and
put-downs (à la "Will & Grace" or virtually everything that comes out of
Nathan Lane's mouth).
And another dynamic is at work. America is, in fact, not titillated
by the gay lifestyle at all, but repulsed by the realization of how similar
it is to the so-called mainstream. Gays are already good parents, good
politicians and good soldiers. Let gays marry and 15 years later, they'll
be sitting around on couches watching moronic Thursday night "must-see TV"
in their old sweatpants and torn underwear just like the rest of us.
But maybe that's the answer. If Americans are so repulsed by gay
sex, perhaps the solution is to just allow gays to marry and have kids.
After all, everyone knows that parents of young children have no time for
sex.
. Gersh Kuntzman is also a columnist for The New York Post.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
TV Boasts a Summer of Guys and Gays
By Frazier Moore
NEW YORK (AP) - This summer, television has gone boy-crazy - in more
ways than one.
Red-blooded American males are being wooed by the new Spike TV, a
sort of cable-network kegger boasting all the things young men are thought
to crave, among them: girls, cars, crazy stunts and girls.
Meanwhile, "Boy Meets Boy" - a twist on dating shows, with some of
the suitors secretly straight - and "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," where
five gay fashion experts rehabilitate a hetero schmo, have seized the
public's attention.
Thus has TV made it clear: This is the summer of the Guys and the
Gays!
At least one show is swinging both ways. Last week, Jay Leno
welcomed Arnold Schwarzenegger to "The Tonight Show," where this
rootin'-tootin' he-man declared his gubernatorial candidacy.
Then Thursday and Friday, Leno is scheduled to bring on the Fab Five
from "Queer Eye" for a makeover.
Although "Queer Eye" (like "Boy Meets Boy") originates on cable's
Bravo, it has won an atta-boy from NBC, which is re-airing an episode
Thursday at 10 p.m. EDT - before "The Tonight Show" and right after "Will &
Grace," the longrunning sitcom about gay men and the straight women who love
them.
But TV would never neglect the more traditional model of manhood.
With that in mind, Spike TV, casting off its old identity as The
National Network, aims to be a Y-chromosome Lifetime. Or, in the words of
its president, Albie Hecht, to be the young man's "new best friend"
(although presumably strictly platonic).
The network, Hecht said in June, "is about the broadness of what guys
are in their totality. They're interested in cars, fitness, health and
travel."
And in waging turf battles, too, as Spike TV was reminded by
filmmaker-guy Spike Lee when he disputed its right to use the same name as
his. (Who you callin' a network?!)
But Lee's much-publicized lawsuit was settled with no punches thrown.
As of this week, Spike TV is officially Spike TV, boasting such fare as a
celebrity-car show called "Ride with Funkmaster Flex" and "Stripperella," a
cartoon starring Pamela Anderson.
The cause of regular guys is elsewhere being championed by "The Man
Show," which begins a new season on Comedy Central at 10 p.m. EDT Sunday.
New co-hosts Doug Stanhope and Joe Rogan, both picture-perfect
Ordinary Joes, celebrate male-chauvinist pleasures like beer, junk food,
televised sports, slovenly appearance and lust for unattainable women
(especially busty women on trampolines).
Is this really what men want? Who's asking? While the male of the
species continues to stalk that distant mirage known as manhood, TV is eager
to serve him with its own distorted versions en route.
In the early 1990s, the so-called men's movement (complete with drum
beating, Wild Man weekends and "Iron John") was all the rage. Then,
harnessing the "More power!" shtick of comedian Tim Allen, ABC's sitcom
"Home Improvement" took the personal crusade by men to reconnect with their
collective masculine unconscious - and turned it into sight gags.
"Home Improvement" was still going great guns after the men's
movement was just a memory.
Now, an ABC sitcom premiering this fall will try to mine laughs from
the clash between gay and straight potential in-laws.
Set in Boston, "It's All Relative" pairs the working-class son of a
bigoted bar owner with a Harvard-educated lass raised by two gay men (one a
teacher and the other a gallery owner).
Trying to talk their daughter out of marrying the lad, the desperate
dads share their personal experience:
"Having the hots for a hunky bartender is part of growing up,"
concedes the gallery owner. "But, you outgrow it."
"Then," chimes in the teacher with a glance toward his partner, "you
marry someone you actually have something in common with."
Woops, did he say "marry"? Isn't that a crime or something? Didn't
President Bush speak out against gay marriage only a couple of weeks ago?
Don't most Americans agree with him? But don't others, including a New York
Times columnist, wonder why Bush implied "that gays who want to make a
permanent commitment in a world full of divorce and loneliness are sinners"?
Whoaaaa, dude, this is getting way too heavy. Is wrestling on? Toss
me a brew!
. On the Net: Spike TV: www.spiketv.com
Bravo Network: www.bravotv.com
NBC: www.nbc.com
"Man Show": www.comedycentral.com
. Editor's Note: Frazier Moore can be reached at fmoore@ap.org
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
Lutherans Avoid Controversy Over Gay Sex
By Tim Cigelske
MILWAUKEE (AP) - The director of a study on homosexuality in the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America acknowledged Tuesday that whether gay
sex is sinful is a "key question" under consideration - but didn't say
whether his group had reached a conclusion.
Members of the ELCA instead focused mainly on technical issues
concerning the four-year study, which is scheduled to be presented at the
ELCA's next meeting in 2005. The report is expected to address whether to
allow or forbid sexually active gay clergy and same-sex blessings.
Gathering a week after the Episcopal Church confirmed its first
openly gay bishop, 500 people packed a morning forum about the Lutheran
study. Another session on the study later in the day drew a smaller crowd.
The Rev. Margaret Payne, chairwoman of the study, said the church was
committed to an in-depth look at homosexuality and would not be swayed by
the Episcopal Church's actions.
One person at the morning forum wondered if the church was "begging
this question to death" with its long study on gay issues.
"That feeling of impatience is understandable," said the Rev. James
Childs, the study's director. "But it takes some time when you have an
issue where people are so deeply divided."
Asked if his group had considered whether gay sex is sinful, Childs
replied: "That is one of the key questions people need to grapple with."
But he didn't elaborate on the committee's findings.
The committee's next step is to release an interim report to the
ELCA's congregations this fall for further comment and debate.
The ELCA welcomes gay and lesbian members, and its ministers can be
openly gay or lesbian if they are celibate.
. On The Net: http://www.elca.org/
National Post, August 9, 2003
300 - 1450 Don Mills Road, Don Mills, Ontario, M3B 3R5 Canada
(E-Mail: letters@nationalpost.com )(http://www.nationalpost.com )
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=E8856165-4D10-4F47-AAB5
-545B0AB4E58D
Where's the harm in gay marriage?
Andrew Coyne
Who knew: After Kyoto, campaign finance, not to mention the
leadership struggle, the issue that may finally rend the Liberal government
asunder is ... gay marriage? As much as half the Liberal caucus is said to
be ready to break with the government over the matter. With 70 or more
opposition members likely to vote against amending the Marriage Act to
include homosexual couples, there is a real possibility that the legislation
may not pass.
On the surface, this is puzzling. The last census found gay couples
living common-law made up less than 0.5% of all domestic couples. Once the
novelty has worn off, the number of gay weddings across Canada is likely to
be no more than a few hundred a year. The vast, vast majority of marriages
will continue to be between a man and a woman. It is difficult to see how
the commitments they make to one another on their wedding day could be one
bit weakened merely because, somewhere in Canada, a homosexual couple was
repeating the same vows.
But then, as we are often reminded, this is about so much more than
whether homosexuals should be allowed to wed. The issue has embroiled a
number of society's basic institutions: family, Church, Parliament, the
courts. It engages some of our most deeply felt needs and profound beliefs:
sexuality and spirituality, minority rights and majority rule. No wonder
it's such a big deal.
So perhaps, as the controversy grows and metastasizes, it is worth
pointing out what this is not about. It is not, first, about judicial
activism, or "judge-made law." Those who profess themselves revolted that
the courts should lately have overturned the definition of marriage as "the
lawful union between one man and one woman for life" should be reminded that
that definition was itself written by a judge. The courts in three
provinces were persuaded to overturn that 19th century common-law definition
not by personal whim, but by the receipt of more recent instructions from
the legislatures. I do not mean only the 1982 Charter of Rights, with its
blanket insistence on the right of every person to equal treatment before
and under the law, but also the later inclusion of sexual orientation among
the prohibited grounds for discrimination in human rights legislation across
the country.
It can of course be debated whether the Charter's equality clause
should be read as an open-ended guarantee, or whether it should be construed
to exclude homosexuals. But it is not an extreme interpretation of
"everyone" to say it means everyone, and in any case it is the job of the
judges to interpret the law - not since the Charter, but since the law. If
we accept the principle of equality, we cannot avoid the practice.
At the same time, this is not about inalienable rights, either. Some
of the courts' defenders have cast their task as one of defending unpopular
minorities from hostile majorities. Not so. Whatever the theoretical basis
for individual and minority rights, as a practical matter they can only have
such protection as the majority chooses to afford them. Indeed, as a matter
or principle it should be so: It would be intolerable in a democracy to
decide such important questions any other way. The courts' job is simply to
hold the majority to their word.
That is what the Charter was: a promise. We committed ourselves, by
majority vote, to the protection of minority rights, because we believed it
was in the interest of the majority to do so. But we attached a proviso.
While the burden of proof is always on the majority to show why rights
should be curtailed, where such cause can be shown the prerogative of the
majority is undoubted. Rights are presumptive, but not absolute.
If it could be shown that allowing gays to marry would cause some
irrevocable harm to the institution of marriage - if there were even a
plausible reason to suppose it might - then we would be entitled to say,
sorry kids, the wedding's off. But neither evidence nor reason has been
produced in support of this prophecy. It is simply asserted, or assumed.
Does that mean anything goes? No: this is not about polygamy and
incest, either. If we let gays marry, it is because we think it will do
little harm, might even do some good, and in such cases defer to the general
right to equal treatment. But you can make a strong case that polygamy and
incest are harmful and destabilizing, in a way that homosexuality, least of
all monogamous homosexuality, is not. That is sufficient basis for
prohibiting such practices: It is also the only basis on which they should
be prohibited.
Last, this is not about the separation of church and state. The
Catholic church has taken a lashing in the press for presuming to enter the
debate. "This is not a theocracy," one columnist huffed. But it is
precisely because we are not a theocracy that the Church is entitled to make
its views known forcefully, like any social group - even to the point of
warning the PM, in the words of one bishop, that he risked his eternal soul.
Is that "spiritual blackmail?" Only if insincere. If the bishop
truly believes, as I'm sure he does, that the Prime Minister is about to
step into Hell's manhole, is he not obliged, as a man of conscience, to cry
"look out?"
exceptionally friendly couple months for gays. Still, the president and the
Pope both object to same-sex marriage.
2. ASSOCIATED PRESS TV Boasts a Summer of Guys and Gays
3. ASSOCIATED PRESS Lutherans (Try To) Avoid Controversy Over Gay Sex
4. NATIONAL POST (Canada) Andrew Coyne: Where's the harm in gay marriage?
Newsweek (Web Exclusive), August 11, 2003
251 West 57th Street, New York, NY, 10019
(Fax: 212-445-4120 ) (EMAIL: letters@newsweek.com )
( http://www.newsweek.com )
http://www.msnbc.com/news/951035.asp
A Queer Summer for Gays
It's been an exceptionally friendly couple months for gays. Still, the
president and the Pope both object to same-sex marriage. Our columnist
explores the culture clash
Gersh Kuntzman, Newsweek Web Exclusive
If you were watching America from somewhere in a low orbit for the
past few months, you'd think we were the most gay-friendly country on Earth.
Consider all that has happened recently:
The Supreme Court ruled that states couldn't make gay sex illegal.
New York City is setting up a full-fledged high school for gay students (to
prevent abuse of homosexual teens, city officials said, not to give a select
group of students a way to honor the Supreme Court ruling). The openly
conservative New York Post put a gay couple on the front page - and
applauded their union - after they got married in Toronto. A major church
made history by electing its first gay (or at least openly gay) bishop. One
of the final three couples on "The Amazing Race" is a gay team, Chip and
Reichen, who met, lest we forget, while Reichen was in the Air Force! (And,
of the three teams left, America has made them the "most popular" on the CBS
Web site. Forget popularity, they deserve to win. They're so ...
together.) And, finally, one of the most popular shows on television right
now is "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," a show that posits that "straight"
men are so inept socially, stylistically and culturally that they need a
team of gay men to make them over.
So, given all that's happened, one has to wonder, is this a gay, er,
I mean, great country, or what?
But how widely accepted is the gay lifestyle? This week, loudmouthed
Giants wide-receiver Jeremy Shockey became embroiled in controversy when he
called one of the team's former coaches a "homo." Not only was Shockey's
use of the epithet immediately attacked, but he apologized by proclaiming
that he doesn't consider the word "homo" an epithet at all. There you have
it, folks, final evidence of how far gays have come in our society: when
straight guys call other straight guys gay, it's not an insult - it's a
compliment!
Besides, a poll last year showed that 32 percent of Americans said
that gay sex is not wrong "at all." Since only 5 to 10 percent of the
population is gay, well, you do the math.
Of course, there are still those among us fighting the homofication
of America. One of them is George W. Bush, who made an extraordinary
comment the other day when a reporter asked him about homosexuality: "Mr.
President . As someone who has spoken out in strongly moral terms, what's
your view on homosexuality?" The answer tried to please so many
constituencies that it sounded like the president was channeling our old
friend Bill "Definition of 'Is'" Clinton:
"Yeah, I am mindful that we're all sinners," he began. "And I
caution those who may try to take the speck out of the neighbor's eye when
they got a log in their own. I think it is important for our society to
respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a
welcoming country. On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like
me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage. [I'm sorry, but was he
asked about marriage?] That's really where the issue is headed here in
Washington. And that is the definition of marriage. I believe marriage is
between a man and a woman and I believe we ought to codify that one way or
the other and we have lawyers looking at the best way to do that."
Indeed, classic Bush. In one sentence, he both urged compassion and
respect for gay Americans and yet also vowed to make their lives as
difficult as the law will allow - and tougher still if his lawyers figure
out a way.
Of course, my favorite news story of the week was Pope John Paul II's
announcement that he also objects to gay marriage. Now there was a
surprise. You know, I hate to refer to such mundane reference materials as
the calendar, but it's 2003, not 1553. The Catholic Church does many good
things in our society - I can't name one right now, but I'm sure there's
something - but providing qualified sex or marriage counseling is not one of
them. Who gave priests - who are supposed to be celibate and spouse-less -
such a strong role over such institutions anyway? Indeed, if we believe the
official line, the Pope hasn't had sex since he was a ski-bum actor named
Karol Wojtyla - and that was 60 years ago in Nazi-occupied Poland. Things
have changed a little since gays were being gassed by Hitler, Pontiff.
The Vatican's 12-page, succinctly titled document, "Considerations
Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition of Unions Between Homosexual
Persons," predictably argued against equal rights for gays. But it also
added that gay adoption does "violence" to children. If someone can show me
crime statistics showing that gay parents abuse their kids at a higher rate
than straight parents, I'll gladly praise the Pope's valiant stance. Until
then, John Paul should stick to his holy rituals, not spewing factless
theocratic propaganda.
Such Taliban-like decrees have no place in American political life.
True, most Americans believe that marriage is fundamentally a religious
institution. But that view, like the Vatican's, is incompatible with the
role marriage plays in our civic life. Cities, states and the federal
government use marriage as a way of deciding who gets spousal death,
retirement and health benefits. If the separation of Church and State is to
mean anything at all, only people who marry in a civil ceremony should be
eligible for such public benefits. Churches, synagogues, mosques and
temples should have no supervisory role.
In New York City, as in some other localities, people are allowed to
register as domestic partners-ensuring that "spouses" get city benefits.
Nearly 20,000 people - 70 percent of whom are estimated to be
homosexuals-are registered. The Union has, apparently, survived.
The principal objection that anti-gay Americans and clergymen have to
homosexuality seems to be the fact that homosexuals have gay sex, but I
think there are larger issues at work. Perhaps what bothers America most
about gays is the increasing evidence - which is the basis for "Queer Eye"
in the first place - that the world would be better if gays were running it.
No more bad hair days. No more tasteless presidential suits. No more
foreign policy machismo. Plenty of all night parties at clubs on Eighth
Avenue in Manhattan and in West Hollywood filled with thong-wearing men and
fishnet-wearing women (or vice-versa). Lots of witty bons-mots and
put-downs (à la "Will & Grace" or virtually everything that comes out of
Nathan Lane's mouth).
And another dynamic is at work. America is, in fact, not titillated
by the gay lifestyle at all, but repulsed by the realization of how similar
it is to the so-called mainstream. Gays are already good parents, good
politicians and good soldiers. Let gays marry and 15 years later, they'll
be sitting around on couches watching moronic Thursday night "must-see TV"
in their old sweatpants and torn underwear just like the rest of us.
But maybe that's the answer. If Americans are so repulsed by gay
sex, perhaps the solution is to just allow gays to marry and have kids.
After all, everyone knows that parents of young children have no time for
sex.
. Gersh Kuntzman is also a columnist for The New York Post.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
TV Boasts a Summer of Guys and Gays
By Frazier Moore
NEW YORK (AP) - This summer, television has gone boy-crazy - in more
ways than one.
Red-blooded American males are being wooed by the new Spike TV, a
sort of cable-network kegger boasting all the things young men are thought
to crave, among them: girls, cars, crazy stunts and girls.
Meanwhile, "Boy Meets Boy" - a twist on dating shows, with some of
the suitors secretly straight - and "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," where
five gay fashion experts rehabilitate a hetero schmo, have seized the
public's attention.
Thus has TV made it clear: This is the summer of the Guys and the
Gays!
At least one show is swinging both ways. Last week, Jay Leno
welcomed Arnold Schwarzenegger to "The Tonight Show," where this
rootin'-tootin' he-man declared his gubernatorial candidacy.
Then Thursday and Friday, Leno is scheduled to bring on the Fab Five
from "Queer Eye" for a makeover.
Although "Queer Eye" (like "Boy Meets Boy") originates on cable's
Bravo, it has won an atta-boy from NBC, which is re-airing an episode
Thursday at 10 p.m. EDT - before "The Tonight Show" and right after "Will &
Grace," the longrunning sitcom about gay men and the straight women who love
them.
But TV would never neglect the more traditional model of manhood.
With that in mind, Spike TV, casting off its old identity as The
National Network, aims to be a Y-chromosome Lifetime. Or, in the words of
its president, Albie Hecht, to be the young man's "new best friend"
(although presumably strictly platonic).
The network, Hecht said in June, "is about the broadness of what guys
are in their totality. They're interested in cars, fitness, health and
travel."
And in waging turf battles, too, as Spike TV was reminded by
filmmaker-guy Spike Lee when he disputed its right to use the same name as
his. (Who you callin' a network?!)
But Lee's much-publicized lawsuit was settled with no punches thrown.
As of this week, Spike TV is officially Spike TV, boasting such fare as a
celebrity-car show called "Ride with Funkmaster Flex" and "Stripperella," a
cartoon starring Pamela Anderson.
The cause of regular guys is elsewhere being championed by "The Man
Show," which begins a new season on Comedy Central at 10 p.m. EDT Sunday.
New co-hosts Doug Stanhope and Joe Rogan, both picture-perfect
Ordinary Joes, celebrate male-chauvinist pleasures like beer, junk food,
televised sports, slovenly appearance and lust for unattainable women
(especially busty women on trampolines).
Is this really what men want? Who's asking? While the male of the
species continues to stalk that distant mirage known as manhood, TV is eager
to serve him with its own distorted versions en route.
In the early 1990s, the so-called men's movement (complete with drum
beating, Wild Man weekends and "Iron John") was all the rage. Then,
harnessing the "More power!" shtick of comedian Tim Allen, ABC's sitcom
"Home Improvement" took the personal crusade by men to reconnect with their
collective masculine unconscious - and turned it into sight gags.
"Home Improvement" was still going great guns after the men's
movement was just a memory.
Now, an ABC sitcom premiering this fall will try to mine laughs from
the clash between gay and straight potential in-laws.
Set in Boston, "It's All Relative" pairs the working-class son of a
bigoted bar owner with a Harvard-educated lass raised by two gay men (one a
teacher and the other a gallery owner).
Trying to talk their daughter out of marrying the lad, the desperate
dads share their personal experience:
"Having the hots for a hunky bartender is part of growing up,"
concedes the gallery owner. "But, you outgrow it."
"Then," chimes in the teacher with a glance toward his partner, "you
marry someone you actually have something in common with."
Woops, did he say "marry"? Isn't that a crime or something? Didn't
President Bush speak out against gay marriage only a couple of weeks ago?
Don't most Americans agree with him? But don't others, including a New York
Times columnist, wonder why Bush implied "that gays who want to make a
permanent commitment in a world full of divorce and loneliness are sinners"?
Whoaaaa, dude, this is getting way too heavy. Is wrestling on? Toss
me a brew!
. On the Net: Spike TV: www.spiketv.com
Bravo Network: www.bravotv.com
NBC: www.nbc.com
"Man Show": www.comedycentral.com
. Editor's Note: Frazier Moore can be reached at fmoore@ap.org
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
Lutherans Avoid Controversy Over Gay Sex
By Tim Cigelske
MILWAUKEE (AP) - The director of a study on homosexuality in the
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America acknowledged Tuesday that whether gay
sex is sinful is a "key question" under consideration - but didn't say
whether his group had reached a conclusion.
Members of the ELCA instead focused mainly on technical issues
concerning the four-year study, which is scheduled to be presented at the
ELCA's next meeting in 2005. The report is expected to address whether to
allow or forbid sexually active gay clergy and same-sex blessings.
Gathering a week after the Episcopal Church confirmed its first
openly gay bishop, 500 people packed a morning forum about the Lutheran
study. Another session on the study later in the day drew a smaller crowd.
The Rev. Margaret Payne, chairwoman of the study, said the church was
committed to an in-depth look at homosexuality and would not be swayed by
the Episcopal Church's actions.
One person at the morning forum wondered if the church was "begging
this question to death" with its long study on gay issues.
"That feeling of impatience is understandable," said the Rev. James
Childs, the study's director. "But it takes some time when you have an
issue where people are so deeply divided."
Asked if his group had considered whether gay sex is sinful, Childs
replied: "That is one of the key questions people need to grapple with."
But he didn't elaborate on the committee's findings.
The committee's next step is to release an interim report to the
ELCA's congregations this fall for further comment and debate.
The ELCA welcomes gay and lesbian members, and its ministers can be
openly gay or lesbian if they are celibate.
. On The Net: http://www.elca.org/
National Post, August 9, 2003
300 - 1450 Don Mills Road, Don Mills, Ontario, M3B 3R5 Canada
(E-Mail: letters@nationalpost.com )(http://www.nationalpost.com )
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=E8856165-4D10-4F47-AAB5
-545B0AB4E58D
Where's the harm in gay marriage?
Andrew Coyne
Who knew: After Kyoto, campaign finance, not to mention the
leadership struggle, the issue that may finally rend the Liberal government
asunder is ... gay marriage? As much as half the Liberal caucus is said to
be ready to break with the government over the matter. With 70 or more
opposition members likely to vote against amending the Marriage Act to
include homosexual couples, there is a real possibility that the legislation
may not pass.
On the surface, this is puzzling. The last census found gay couples
living common-law made up less than 0.5% of all domestic couples. Once the
novelty has worn off, the number of gay weddings across Canada is likely to
be no more than a few hundred a year. The vast, vast majority of marriages
will continue to be between a man and a woman. It is difficult to see how
the commitments they make to one another on their wedding day could be one
bit weakened merely because, somewhere in Canada, a homosexual couple was
repeating the same vows.
But then, as we are often reminded, this is about so much more than
whether homosexuals should be allowed to wed. The issue has embroiled a
number of society's basic institutions: family, Church, Parliament, the
courts. It engages some of our most deeply felt needs and profound beliefs:
sexuality and spirituality, minority rights and majority rule. No wonder
it's such a big deal.
So perhaps, as the controversy grows and metastasizes, it is worth
pointing out what this is not about. It is not, first, about judicial
activism, or "judge-made law." Those who profess themselves revolted that
the courts should lately have overturned the definition of marriage as "the
lawful union between one man and one woman for life" should be reminded that
that definition was itself written by a judge. The courts in three
provinces were persuaded to overturn that 19th century common-law definition
not by personal whim, but by the receipt of more recent instructions from
the legislatures. I do not mean only the 1982 Charter of Rights, with its
blanket insistence on the right of every person to equal treatment before
and under the law, but also the later inclusion of sexual orientation among
the prohibited grounds for discrimination in human rights legislation across
the country.
It can of course be debated whether the Charter's equality clause
should be read as an open-ended guarantee, or whether it should be construed
to exclude homosexuals. But it is not an extreme interpretation of
"everyone" to say it means everyone, and in any case it is the job of the
judges to interpret the law - not since the Charter, but since the law. If
we accept the principle of equality, we cannot avoid the practice.
At the same time, this is not about inalienable rights, either. Some
of the courts' defenders have cast their task as one of defending unpopular
minorities from hostile majorities. Not so. Whatever the theoretical basis
for individual and minority rights, as a practical matter they can only have
such protection as the majority chooses to afford them. Indeed, as a matter
or principle it should be so: It would be intolerable in a democracy to
decide such important questions any other way. The courts' job is simply to
hold the majority to their word.
That is what the Charter was: a promise. We committed ourselves, by
majority vote, to the protection of minority rights, because we believed it
was in the interest of the majority to do so. But we attached a proviso.
While the burden of proof is always on the majority to show why rights
should be curtailed, where such cause can be shown the prerogative of the
majority is undoubted. Rights are presumptive, but not absolute.
If it could be shown that allowing gays to marry would cause some
irrevocable harm to the institution of marriage - if there were even a
plausible reason to suppose it might - then we would be entitled to say,
sorry kids, the wedding's off. But neither evidence nor reason has been
produced in support of this prophecy. It is simply asserted, or assumed.
Does that mean anything goes? No: this is not about polygamy and
incest, either. If we let gays marry, it is because we think it will do
little harm, might even do some good, and in such cases defer to the general
right to equal treatment. But you can make a strong case that polygamy and
incest are harmful and destabilizing, in a way that homosexuality, least of
all monogamous homosexuality, is not. That is sufficient basis for
prohibiting such practices: It is also the only basis on which they should
be prohibited.
Last, this is not about the separation of church and state. The
Catholic church has taken a lashing in the press for presuming to enter the
debate. "This is not a theocracy," one columnist huffed. But it is
precisely because we are not a theocracy that the Church is entitled to make
its views known forcefully, like any social group - even to the point of
warning the PM, in the words of one bishop, that he risked his eternal soul.
Is that "spiritual blackmail?" Only if insincere. If the bishop
truly believes, as I'm sure he does, that the Prime Minister is about to
step into Hell's manhole, is he not obliged, as a man of conscience, to cry
"look out?"
August 12, 2003
Lutherans won't follow Episcopal vote on gays, Phils' hosting of gay group stirs talk - Talk radio has been abuzz
1. CHICAGO TRIBUNE Lutherans take up debate on gays; Evangelical branch to
present interim report this week
2. ASSOCIATED PRESS Lutherans won't follow Episcopal vote on gays anytime
soon
3. PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER Phils' hosting of gay group stirs talk; The
scoreboard will note "Gay Community Day" at tonight's game, along with the
names of other groups. Talk radio has been abuzz.
Chicago Tribune, August 12, 2003
435 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60611
(Fax: 312-222-2598 ) (E-Mail: ctc-tribletter@tribune.com )
( http://www.chicagotribune.com )
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0308120273aug12,1,6960506
.story
Lutherans take up debate on gays
Evangelical branch to present interim report this week
By Manya A. Brachear, Tribune staff reporter
MILWAUKEE - Just a week after the Episcopal Church approved an openly
gay bishop and let individual churches decide whether to bless same-sex
unions, the nation's largest Lutheran denomination convened Monday to pick
up a similar debate.
For the 5.1 million-member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America,
the discussion of homosexual marriage and openly gay pastors has its own
unique twists and timeline. Homosexuals already may become pastors if they
agree to remain celibate. And individual churches may bless same-sex unions
despite a non-binding statement made a decade ago by the church's 66 bishops
condemning such ceremonies.
The Evangelical Lutherans' discussion began two years ago when the
church commissioned a task force to study homosexuality from scriptural,
theological and scientific points of view. Although the study is due in
2005, an interim report is to be presented Friday. Hearings on the matter
begin Tuesday.
"It's time for us as people of faith to learn to talk about the gift
of sexuality" and learn to be "stewards of this mysterious, strong and
powerful gift," said Bishop Mark Hanson, president and chief executive
officer of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which is
headquartered in Chicago.
Church conservatives want the study to take longer and will be
reiterating that argument this week.
"There is no need for this delay," said Rev. Daphne Burt, associate
dean of Rockefeller Chapel at the University of Chicago who went to
Milwaukee to distribute fliers for the Lutheran Alliance for Full
Participation, a coalition of advocates for gay clergy and same-sex
marriage. "This delay is harmful to the church. ... I think it is past
time for the church to offer its blessing."
As a bisexual pastor, Burt is in a quandary.
"If I date somebody of the opposite gender, it's not a problem. If I
fall in love with a woman, it's a problem," she said. "The irony is if I
fall in love with a man, no one's going to ask if I'm having sex before
marriage."
The church states "single ordained ministers are expected to lead a
chaste life." It is up to bishops in each synod to enforce that.
Bishop Steven Ullestad of the Northeastern Iowa Synod agrees that the
church hasn't been clear about heterosexual standards of behavior. That's
why the church should extend the study until 2007 so it can communicate
those standards.
"The church needs to be clear on that first before blessing same-sex
unions," he said.
Ullestad also would like to see more scientific evidence and a more
broad-based consensus among Lutherans. His synod is evenly split between
labeling homosexuality a sin and continuing the study.
"The timeline is so inordinately quick," he said.
But after the Episcopal Church's decision last week to approve Rev.
V. Gene Robinson, who is gay, as bishop-elect of New Hampshire, many
churches are feeling some pressure to come to a conclusion.
The Evangelical Lutherans are in a special position because they
share full communion with five other denominations, including Episcopalians.
Ministers of Episcopal Church, Moravian Church in America and Presbyterian
USA, United Church of Christ and Reform Church in America may serve in the
pulpit of a Lutheran church.
"This has riled up the [Evangelical Lutheran] conservatives," Burt
said. "Their rhetoric is going to get very shrill."
Rev. Jeff Johnson, president of the Extraordinary Candidates Project,
a group of 35 ordained gay pastors who refuse to follow the church's
celibacy rules, said the Episcopal Church's decision fueled some
conservatives' disapproval of the full communion effort.
Johnson, a pastor at University Lutheran Church in Berkeley, Calif.,
was the catalyst for the Evangelical Lutheran's celibacy rule. In 1988, he
and two other openly gay seminarians were approved for ordination at the
same time the Evangelical Lutherans formed. Nervous bishops decided
celibacy was the best compromise.
"For those of us who take the Scripture seriously, this is really
about locking the doors of the church," Johnson said.
He said Martin Luther believed celibacy was a gift, so imposing it on
a select group is counterintuitive to Lutheran doctrine.
"If you require a gift, you force people into untenable situations,"
he said.
Denominations differ on homosexuality
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, headquartered in Chicago,
is the nation's largest denomination of Lutheran churches.
It was formed in 1988 by a merger of three Lutheran denominations:
the American Lutheran Church, Lutheran Church of America and the Association
of Evangelical Lutherans. The church has 5.1 million members.
Unlike the Evangelical Lutherans, the Lutheran Church's Missouri
Synod, which claims 2.6 million members, condemns homosexual behavior. The
Evangelical Lutherans ordain women to the pastoral office, but the Missouri
Synod does not.
Another group, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, based in
Milwaukee, also condemns homosexuality. It does not ordain women nor let
women vote in church matters.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/4036928.html
Lutherans won't follow Episcopal vote on gays anytime soon
Tim Cigelske, Associated Press
MILWAUKEE - The head of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
(ELCA) said Monday he was "mindful" that the Episcopal Church confirmed its
first openly gay bishop last week but that his denomination would not
quickly follow suit.
The Episcopal General Convention ratified the election of the Rev.
Gene Robinson as New Hampshire's bishop and affirmed same-sex blessings as
"an acceptable practice in the church."
The Rev. Mark Hanson, the Evangelical Lutherans' presiding bishop,
said his denomination planned to continue consulting Scripture, church
members, and gays and lesbians - but it will ultimately decide alone whether
to ordain practicing homosexuals.
The ELCA, the fourth-largest Protestant denomination in the United
States, was scheduled to present an interim report today on homosexuality
commissioned at its last assembly in 2001, but the body won't make
recommendations until 2005.
Hanson affirmed the church's current position of allowing homosexuals
in the clergy if they remain celibate.
"We're certainly mindful a week after the Episcopalians made their
decision. But we are at different places in our decisionmaking," Hanson
said. "Ultimately, what we do in terms of human sexuality will be
decisions of this church."
In a separate statement Monday, Catholic Bishop Stephen Blaire of
Stockton, Calif., head of the Catholic Bishops' Committee for Ecumenical and
Interreligious Affairs, said the Episcopal votes "reflect a departure from
the common understanding . . . of human sexuality and the morality of
homosexual activity as found in sacred Scripture and the Christian
tradition."
Still, Blaire said, Catholics are committed to maintaining the
dialogue to achieve Christian unity "however difficult."
Philadelphia Inquirer, August 12, 2003
PO Box 8263, Philadelphia, PA, 19101
(Fax: 215-854-4483 ) (E-Mail: Inquirer.opinion@phillynews.com )
( http://www.philly.com )
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/magazine/daily/6511351.htm
Phils' hosting of gay group stirs talk
The scoreboard will note "Gay Community Day" at tonight's game, along with
the names of other groups. Talk radio has been abuzz.
By Eils Lotozo, Inquirer Staff Writer
With Phillies attendance way up over last year - when they ranked
25th out of the 30 major-league teams - the Phils' selling a few hundred
extra tickets to a group normally wouldn't be much of a story.
Unless, it seems, the ticket buyers are gay.
Three local gay and lesbian professional associations teamed up to
sell more than 550 tickets for tonight's Phillies game against the Milwaukee
Brewers. And their efforts have become fodder for radio talk shows and the
subject of a wire-service story.
The group will fill a section of the upper deck along the first-base
line, and the words "Gay Community Day" will be displayed on the
scoreboard - along with the names of six other groups that bought blocks of
tickets.
The Phillies aren't the first team in the major leagues to host a gay
group, said Kathy Killian, director of group sales for the team. The San
Francisco Giants, the Chicago Cubs, the Atlanta Braves, and the Minnesota
Twins have all done so. "But all the promotions for these events come from
the community, not the ball club," Killian said.
Ditto here. "This is not a Phillies event," said Robert Drake,
president of the Philadelphia chapter of the National Lesbian and Gay
Journalists Association. His group sponsored the baseball outing, along
with Gay and Lesbian Lawyers of Philadelphia and the Gay and Lesbian Medical
Association.
"The Phillies were not reaching out [to the gay community]. They
didn't even think about it until I called them," said Drake, a WXPN-FM
(88.5) radio producer and host.
Drake appeared on Dom Giordano's talk show on WPHT-AM (1210) to
discuss the event. Caller response was largely negative, Drake said. "One
caller said, I don't think the gays should be allowed in Vet Stadium."
On WIP-AM (610) sports-talk radio, reaction to the event has been
split down the middle, said host Angelo Cataldi. He's brought it up more
than once, and yesterday gave away 20 tickets to the game. The winners were
chosen by a regular caller whom Cataldi calls "Kim the lesbian."
An Associated Press story last week on the event prompted the
Pennsylvania chapter of the American Family Association to issue an "action
alert" on its Web site. It urged "those who are concerned with their
children and grandchildren's future" to let the Phillies know they are
disturbed by the decision to host the group.
Killian said the alert seemed to have generated about 75 e-mails to
the Phillies, most of them against the event, and from outside the
Philadelphia region.
Yet, on the Phillies Web site's fan forum there's been little
discussion of "Gay Community Day."
Aware of the possibility for controversy, Larry Felzer, the chair of
the gay lawyers' group, said he was pleasantly surprised at the reception
the group had gotten from the Phillies.
"This has broken a stereotype for me," said Felzer, a longtime
season-ticket holder who will attend three additional Phillies games this
week. "I thought the Phillies organization would be homophobic; I thought
they'd be resistant. But they are treating us just like any other group."
And any group that sells at least 350 tickets gets to have a
representative throw out the first ball (to the Philly Phanatic). Tonight,
Felzer has the honor. "It's a dream come true," he said.
While the Phillies have offered to provide added security, Sue
Gildea, who leads a 500-member gay and lesbian softball league (and who will
be at the game with about 100 players), said she had no fears about the
reception they'll get.
A season-ticket holder, Gildea said: "It's not about who you are,
it's about being a baseball fan, and the more fans we have to come out and
encourage the team, the better."
Said the Phillies' Killian: "Our job is to put fans in the stands,
and this is one more group that wants to buy tickets. This is a weeknight
in August. We don't have many groups who take these nights. That they are
going to take over 500 tickets is just incredible."
Yes, she's heard from some Phillies fans who object to the idea of
promoting a gay outing at the ballpark.
The groups "are not here to be political," Killian said. "They are
just here to have a good time. I think it's great for Philadelphia and
great for the Phillies. It says a lot about our organization. It says our
doors are open and baseball fans are baseball fans."
. Contact staff writer Eils Lotozo at 215-854-5610 or
elotozo@phillynews.com.
present interim report this week
2. ASSOCIATED PRESS Lutherans won't follow Episcopal vote on gays anytime
soon
3. PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER Phils' hosting of gay group stirs talk; The
scoreboard will note "Gay Community Day" at tonight's game, along with the
names of other groups. Talk radio has been abuzz.
Chicago Tribune, August 12, 2003
435 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60611
(Fax: 312-222-2598 ) (E-Mail: ctc-tribletter@tribune.com )
( http://www.chicagotribune.com )
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0308120273aug12,1,6960506
.story
Lutherans take up debate on gays
Evangelical branch to present interim report this week
By Manya A. Brachear, Tribune staff reporter
MILWAUKEE - Just a week after the Episcopal Church approved an openly
gay bishop and let individual churches decide whether to bless same-sex
unions, the nation's largest Lutheran denomination convened Monday to pick
up a similar debate.
For the 5.1 million-member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America,
the discussion of homosexual marriage and openly gay pastors has its own
unique twists and timeline. Homosexuals already may become pastors if they
agree to remain celibate. And individual churches may bless same-sex unions
despite a non-binding statement made a decade ago by the church's 66 bishops
condemning such ceremonies.
The Evangelical Lutherans' discussion began two years ago when the
church commissioned a task force to study homosexuality from scriptural,
theological and scientific points of view. Although the study is due in
2005, an interim report is to be presented Friday. Hearings on the matter
begin Tuesday.
"It's time for us as people of faith to learn to talk about the gift
of sexuality" and learn to be "stewards of this mysterious, strong and
powerful gift," said Bishop Mark Hanson, president and chief executive
officer of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which is
headquartered in Chicago.
Church conservatives want the study to take longer and will be
reiterating that argument this week.
"There is no need for this delay," said Rev. Daphne Burt, associate
dean of Rockefeller Chapel at the University of Chicago who went to
Milwaukee to distribute fliers for the Lutheran Alliance for Full
Participation, a coalition of advocates for gay clergy and same-sex
marriage. "This delay is harmful to the church. ... I think it is past
time for the church to offer its blessing."
As a bisexual pastor, Burt is in a quandary.
"If I date somebody of the opposite gender, it's not a problem. If I
fall in love with a woman, it's a problem," she said. "The irony is if I
fall in love with a man, no one's going to ask if I'm having sex before
marriage."
The church states "single ordained ministers are expected to lead a
chaste life." It is up to bishops in each synod to enforce that.
Bishop Steven Ullestad of the Northeastern Iowa Synod agrees that the
church hasn't been clear about heterosexual standards of behavior. That's
why the church should extend the study until 2007 so it can communicate
those standards.
"The church needs to be clear on that first before blessing same-sex
unions," he said.
Ullestad also would like to see more scientific evidence and a more
broad-based consensus among Lutherans. His synod is evenly split between
labeling homosexuality a sin and continuing the study.
"The timeline is so inordinately quick," he said.
But after the Episcopal Church's decision last week to approve Rev.
V. Gene Robinson, who is gay, as bishop-elect of New Hampshire, many
churches are feeling some pressure to come to a conclusion.
The Evangelical Lutherans are in a special position because they
share full communion with five other denominations, including Episcopalians.
Ministers of Episcopal Church, Moravian Church in America and Presbyterian
USA, United Church of Christ and Reform Church in America may serve in the
pulpit of a Lutheran church.
"This has riled up the [Evangelical Lutheran] conservatives," Burt
said. "Their rhetoric is going to get very shrill."
Rev. Jeff Johnson, president of the Extraordinary Candidates Project,
a group of 35 ordained gay pastors who refuse to follow the church's
celibacy rules, said the Episcopal Church's decision fueled some
conservatives' disapproval of the full communion effort.
Johnson, a pastor at University Lutheran Church in Berkeley, Calif.,
was the catalyst for the Evangelical Lutheran's celibacy rule. In 1988, he
and two other openly gay seminarians were approved for ordination at the
same time the Evangelical Lutherans formed. Nervous bishops decided
celibacy was the best compromise.
"For those of us who take the Scripture seriously, this is really
about locking the doors of the church," Johnson said.
He said Martin Luther believed celibacy was a gift, so imposing it on
a select group is counterintuitive to Lutheran doctrine.
"If you require a gift, you force people into untenable situations,"
he said.
Denominations differ on homosexuality
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, headquartered in Chicago,
is the nation's largest denomination of Lutheran churches.
It was formed in 1988 by a merger of three Lutheran denominations:
the American Lutheran Church, Lutheran Church of America and the Association
of Evangelical Lutherans. The church has 5.1 million members.
Unlike the Evangelical Lutherans, the Lutheran Church's Missouri
Synod, which claims 2.6 million members, condemns homosexual behavior. The
Evangelical Lutherans ordain women to the pastoral office, but the Missouri
Synod does not.
Another group, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, based in
Milwaukee, also condemns homosexuality. It does not ordain women nor let
women vote in church matters.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/4036928.html
Lutherans won't follow Episcopal vote on gays anytime soon
Tim Cigelske, Associated Press
MILWAUKEE - The head of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
(ELCA) said Monday he was "mindful" that the Episcopal Church confirmed its
first openly gay bishop last week but that his denomination would not
quickly follow suit.
The Episcopal General Convention ratified the election of the Rev.
Gene Robinson as New Hampshire's bishop and affirmed same-sex blessings as
"an acceptable practice in the church."
The Rev. Mark Hanson, the Evangelical Lutherans' presiding bishop,
said his denomination planned to continue consulting Scripture, church
members, and gays and lesbians - but it will ultimately decide alone whether
to ordain practicing homosexuals.
The ELCA, the fourth-largest Protestant denomination in the United
States, was scheduled to present an interim report today on homosexuality
commissioned at its last assembly in 2001, but the body won't make
recommendations until 2005.
Hanson affirmed the church's current position of allowing homosexuals
in the clergy if they remain celibate.
"We're certainly mindful a week after the Episcopalians made their
decision. But we are at different places in our decisionmaking," Hanson
said. "Ultimately, what we do in terms of human sexuality will be
decisions of this church."
In a separate statement Monday, Catholic Bishop Stephen Blaire of
Stockton, Calif., head of the Catholic Bishops' Committee for Ecumenical and
Interreligious Affairs, said the Episcopal votes "reflect a departure from
the common understanding . . . of human sexuality and the morality of
homosexual activity as found in sacred Scripture and the Christian
tradition."
Still, Blaire said, Catholics are committed to maintaining the
dialogue to achieve Christian unity "however difficult."
Philadelphia Inquirer, August 12, 2003
PO Box 8263, Philadelphia, PA, 19101
(Fax: 215-854-4483 ) (E-Mail: Inquirer.opinion@phillynews.com )
( http://www.philly.com )
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/magazine/daily/6511351.htm
Phils' hosting of gay group stirs talk
The scoreboard will note "Gay Community Day" at tonight's game, along with
the names of other groups. Talk radio has been abuzz.
By Eils Lotozo, Inquirer Staff Writer
With Phillies attendance way up over last year - when they ranked
25th out of the 30 major-league teams - the Phils' selling a few hundred
extra tickets to a group normally wouldn't be much of a story.
Unless, it seems, the ticket buyers are gay.
Three local gay and lesbian professional associations teamed up to
sell more than 550 tickets for tonight's Phillies game against the Milwaukee
Brewers. And their efforts have become fodder for radio talk shows and the
subject of a wire-service story.
The group will fill a section of the upper deck along the first-base
line, and the words "Gay Community Day" will be displayed on the
scoreboard - along with the names of six other groups that bought blocks of
tickets.
The Phillies aren't the first team in the major leagues to host a gay
group, said Kathy Killian, director of group sales for the team. The San
Francisco Giants, the Chicago Cubs, the Atlanta Braves, and the Minnesota
Twins have all done so. "But all the promotions for these events come from
the community, not the ball club," Killian said.
Ditto here. "This is not a Phillies event," said Robert Drake,
president of the Philadelphia chapter of the National Lesbian and Gay
Journalists Association. His group sponsored the baseball outing, along
with Gay and Lesbian Lawyers of Philadelphia and the Gay and Lesbian Medical
Association.
"The Phillies were not reaching out [to the gay community]. They
didn't even think about it until I called them," said Drake, a WXPN-FM
(88.5) radio producer and host.
Drake appeared on Dom Giordano's talk show on WPHT-AM (1210) to
discuss the event. Caller response was largely negative, Drake said. "One
caller said, I don't think the gays should be allowed in Vet Stadium."
On WIP-AM (610) sports-talk radio, reaction to the event has been
split down the middle, said host Angelo Cataldi. He's brought it up more
than once, and yesterday gave away 20 tickets to the game. The winners were
chosen by a regular caller whom Cataldi calls "Kim the lesbian."
An Associated Press story last week on the event prompted the
Pennsylvania chapter of the American Family Association to issue an "action
alert" on its Web site. It urged "those who are concerned with their
children and grandchildren's future" to let the Phillies know they are
disturbed by the decision to host the group.
Killian said the alert seemed to have generated about 75 e-mails to
the Phillies, most of them against the event, and from outside the
Philadelphia region.
Yet, on the Phillies Web site's fan forum there's been little
discussion of "Gay Community Day."
Aware of the possibility for controversy, Larry Felzer, the chair of
the gay lawyers' group, said he was pleasantly surprised at the reception
the group had gotten from the Phillies.
"This has broken a stereotype for me," said Felzer, a longtime
season-ticket holder who will attend three additional Phillies games this
week. "I thought the Phillies organization would be homophobic; I thought
they'd be resistant. But they are treating us just like any other group."
And any group that sells at least 350 tickets gets to have a
representative throw out the first ball (to the Philly Phanatic). Tonight,
Felzer has the honor. "It's a dream come true," he said.
While the Phillies have offered to provide added security, Sue
Gildea, who leads a 500-member gay and lesbian softball league (and who will
be at the game with about 100 players), said she had no fears about the
reception they'll get.
A season-ticket holder, Gildea said: "It's not about who you are,
it's about being a baseball fan, and the more fans we have to come out and
encourage the team, the better."
Said the Phillies' Killian: "Our job is to put fans in the stands,
and this is one more group that wants to buy tickets. This is a weeknight
in August. We don't have many groups who take these nights. That they are
going to take over 500 tickets is just incredible."
Yes, she's heard from some Phillies fans who object to the idea of
promoting a gay outing at the ballpark.
The groups "are not here to be political," Killian said. "They are
just here to have a good time. I think it's great for Philadelphia and
great for the Phillies. It says a lot about our organization. It says our
doors are open and baseball fans are baseball fans."
. Contact staff writer Eils Lotozo at 215-854-5610 or
elotozo@phillynews.com.
Canadian PM will press on with gay marriage law, Kenya Archbishop says "homosexuals have no place in the Anglican Church of Kenya"
1. CANADIAN PRESS Prime Minister Chretien will press on with gay marriage law
2. EAST AFRICAN STANDARD (Kenya) Kenya Archbishop says "homosexuals have no place in the Anglican Church of Kenya"
3. MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE Homophobic Minnesota state senator Lindner is
"moved but unswayed" by Holocaust exhibit on gays
4. ABC NEWS (Australia) Southeast Queensland church votes against gay
ministers
5. NEW VISION (Uganda) US Gays to Aid Ugandans; Integrity USA promises
assistance to a local Ugandan gay chapter, Integrity Uganda (IU), to expand
"into other parts of the country where keen interest has been expressed"
6. ASSOCIATED PRESS Puerto Rican Episcopal bishop supports designation of
gay bishop
7. ICSURREY (England) A vicar says Anglican leaders were naive in
appointing a homosexual Canon as a Bishop. But, having done so, they should
have stuck to their guns and not be shaken by a wave of publicity about the
appointment
8. OTTAWA CITIZEN Canadian Alliance plans to force early same-sex vote;
Motion is aimed at exploiting divisions within Liberal ranks
9. GAY.COM U.K. Lesbian couple attacked by two men at Brighton Pride
Canadian Press, August 12, 2003
http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=8A108A88-8DB3-44B5-8061-8B4E6FE31F74
PM will press on with gay marriage law
Alexander Panetta, Canadian Press
OTTAWA - Brushing aside threats of eternal damnation, Prime Minister
Jean Chretien promised Tuesday to push forward with legislation that would
allow gays and lesbians to marry.
Chretien didn't appear moved by a warning from a Roman Catholic
bishop that his government's same-sex marriage plans will jeopardize his
eternal soul. He said his responsibilities as prime minister aren't defined
by his religion.
"I'm a Catholic and I'm praying," a smiling Chretien said after a
cabinet meeting.
"But I'm the prime minister of Canada. When I'm the prime minister
of Canada, I'm acting as a person responsible for the nation.
"And the problem of my religion, I'll deal with it in other
circumstances."
He said the government plans to proceed with its original timetable:
wait while the Supreme Court examines the draft marriage legislation, then
create a bill and put it to a free vote in the House of Commons.
The legislative process is not expected to begin until after Chretien
retires next year - and perhaps not until after a federal election.
A large group of dissenting Liberals is threatening to defeat the
legislation by voting against it.
Many are pushing for a parallel status for gays and lesbians other
than marriage, perhaps called a civil union.
However, Justice Minister Martin Cauchon said such a status is
unacceptable because it sends the message homosexuals are less than equal.
Some are pushing the government to add a question about civil unions
to the three queries included in the Supreme Court reference, expected to be
heard next year.
A spokesman for Chretien, Jim Munson, said the government doesn't
plan to ask a fourth question.
East African Standard, August 12, 2003
P.O.Box 30080, Nairobi, Kenya
(E-Mail: online@eaststandard.net ) ( http://www.eaststandard.net )
http://www.eastandard.net/headlines/news13082003006.htm
Anglican Church firm on gay weddings
By Francis Openda
Homosexuals have no place in the Anglican Church of Kenya (ACK)
Archbishop, the Most Reverend Benjamin Nzimbi, said yesterday.
"We are closely watching the developments in the Episcopal Church of
USA and other dioceses within the Communion which are blessing same sex
marriages," said Nzimbi.
Nzimbi returned to the country from Episcopal Churches of USA (Ecusa)
General Convention in Minneapolis where he was an observer.
At the Convention, the House of Bishops approved the election of
practising homosexual, the Rev Gene Robinson, as Bishop of New Hampshire
with 62 votes against 43.
Nzimbi, who is the head of ACK, further repeated his earlier stand
that the church is seriously considering cutting links with dioceses, which
go contrary to the stand.
He said ACK will state its final position after a meeting of the 38
primates of the Anglican Communion scheduled for London in October. The
issue of homosexuality in the church will be top on the agenda.
He said while ACK is not supportive of a split in the Anglican
Communion, a lot will depend on " how things are moving forward."
"Any Anglican diocese which has sanctioned or resolved to bless the
same sex marriage has committed a gross theological error and kicked itself
out of the Anglican Communion," he said.
Addressing a news conference at the ACK Garden House, in Nairobi,
Nzimbi said the Anglican Church is fully bound by the 1998 Lambeth
Conference, which recognises the biblical life-long marriage between man and
woman.
Also present was the ACK Provincial Secretary, Bishop William Waqo,
and the Provost of All Saints Cathedral, Peter Karanja.
Nzimbi said the Convention's vote though a majority is contrary to
the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and the Anglican stand on marriage.
"We are greatly saddened by Ecusa General Convention's confirmation
of the appointment of a bishop who is a practising homosexual last week," he
said.
He said while the church is ready to offer all its faithful pastoral
care, it will not compromise on the sanctioning of homosexual or lesbian
marriages.
Nzimbi called on ACK pastors to carefully explain to faithful the
impact of sanctioning same sex marriages.
He said ACK is autonomous "and they can choose whether to help us or
not but this remains our stand."
He said finances or the way of voting should not be linked to belief
in God.
Nzimbi said while the matter could be a justice issue to others, it
remains a moral issue to Kenyans.
"Every part of the body has got its use and let it be used properly
to glorify God," said Nzimbi.
Minneapolis Star Tribune, August 12, 2003
425 Portland Avenue, Minneapolis, MN, 55408
(Fax: 612-673-4359 ) (E-Mail: opinion@startribune.com )
( http://www.startribune.com/ )
http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4038848.html
Lindner moved but unswayed by Holocaust exhibit on gays
Associated Press
Sometimes removing his glasses to squint at the smallest print, state
Rep. Arlon Lindner closely examined each of 28 panels that the U.S.
Holocaust Memorial Museum sent to this YWCA to document the discrimination
homosexuals suffered at the hands of Nazis.
When he was done, Lindner told reporters he has no regrets for
remarks he made in March that outraged some gays and blacks. He stressed
that he believes the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin and "a
perverted lifestyle."
"I pretty much stand by what I said," said Lindner, a Republican from
Corcoran. "I don't feel that I owe an apology to anybody."
During the legislative session, Lindner was accused by Democratic
legislators of ethics violations for saying that Nazi persecution of
homosexuals is part of a "rewriting of history." Lindner's critics grew
madder still when he said he didn't want "to sit around here and wait until
America becomes another African continent," a reference he said applied to
the spread of HIV and AIDS.
The way Lindner recalls those remarks - made in reference to his bill
to repeal state human rights protections for people based on their sexual
orientation - he was only trying to say that homosexuals never suffered to
the extent that Jewish people did.
He came away from his tour Tuesday convinced that he was right,
although he said he was moved by what he saw and read in the exhibit, called
"Nazi Persecution of Homosexuals 1933-1945."
Still, the man who invited Lindner to take the tour isn't so sure
that the Christian conservative hasn't softened his views.
Stephen Silberfarb, executive director of the Jewish Community
Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, walked alongside the
representative at every step through the display. The two exchanged remarks
on topics ranging from Nazi leaders who were themselves gay to the propriety
of anti-sodomy laws, which Lindner defended.
Silberfarb said he believes Lindner's original comments implied he
didn't believe any persecution occurred.
"I think we've concluded today that it did happen, and to that degree
I think progress has been made," Silberfarb said.
He also gave Lindner credit for publicly touring the exhibit, saying
it showed a commitment to the principle of civil debate.
For his part, Lindner showed up to the YWCA early and alone. He then
made his way to the basement display where he patiently allowed reporters to
attach microphones to his shirt before he began to read each panel, in
order.
Though Lindner said little as he read, in the background his March
comments could occasionally be heard, playing on a continuous loop on a
monitor set up for the display.
The exhibit is a collection of drawings, photographs and original
German documents detailing Nazi treatment of homosexuals. Local organizers
pressed to attract the exhibit in the wake of press attention to Lindner's
comments.
It documents a campaign that resulted in the arrest of about 100,000
gay men - about half of whom were sent to prison. Thousands of those were
sent to concentration camps, where an unknown number died. Those figures,
Lindner said, support his original thoughts. "They go after 100,000.
That's a small number compared to 2 million," he said, referring to
estimates of the total number of German homosexuals.
When he was all done, in the drawl that gives away his Texas roots,
Lindner said he plans to try again to push his bill and to do what he can do
to "try to protect the family and children that are influenced by this."
Said Lindner: "I'm a Christian and God knows us better than we know
ourselves. And it's in the Bible that homosexuality is a sin and it's wrong
and it's a perverted lifestyle. I don't try to go against my maker."
ABC News (Australia), 13 August 2003
http://www.abc.net.au/brisbane/news/200308/s922933.htm
SE Qld church votes against gay ministers
Leaders of the Uniting church in south-east Queensland have rejected
their national body's decision to allow homosexuals to be ordained as
ministers.
About 100 church members met in Beenleigh south of Brisbane last
night and voted to maintain the status quo, which blocks homosexuals from
holding any positions of leadership.
The Reverend Ray Reddicliffe says parishioners wanted to express
their strong disappointment and deep regret.
"While it is conceivable that could happen, I think at this stage
it's very clear that most people, that's not how they would like to see it,"
he said.
New Vision, August 12, 2003
P.O. Box 9815, Kampala, Uganda
(E-Mail: nvision@newvision.co.ug ) ( http://www.newvision.co.ug )
http://allafrica.com/stories/200308120748.html
US Gays to Aid Ugandans
John Kakande
Kampala - Integrity USA, an American organisation of homosexuals, has
promised assistance to a local Ugandan gay chapter, Integrity Uganda (IU),
to expand "into other parts of the country where keen interest has been
expressed."
Integrity USA has also promised to give assistance to IU to organise
a "Pan-African conference of lesbian and gay Anglicans prior to the next
scheduled Lambeth Conference in 2008."
According to documents seen by The New Vision, the President of
Integrity USA, the Rev. Michael W. Hopkins, the Rector of St. George's
Church, Glenn Dale, Maryland, visited Uganda discreetly for two-weeks and
held discussions with the IU in Uganda, an organisation of gays, lesbians
and bisexuals.
"A goal of Integrity/Kampala is to sponsor a pan-African conference
of lesbian and gay Anglicans prior to the next scheduled Lambeth Conference
in 2008. Integrity USA will provide assistance to this indigenous effort,"
the document says.
Hopkins' visit in June last year was the first to Uganda and Africa.
He revealed that while in Uganda, he visited the Anglican Martyrs shrine
where they had prayers on June 10, 2003.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
http://www.puertoricowow.com/html/general-detail.asp?amaspHidden_listActive=
true&amaspField_newshd=Puerto%20Rican%20bishop%20supports%20designation%20of
%20gay%20bishop%20&amaspHidden_newshd_dataType=string
Puerto Rican bishop supports designation of gay bishop
SAN JUAN (AP) - Puerto Rican Episcopal Church Monsignor David Alvarez
said Tuesday that he supports the designation of the first openly homosexual
bishop in the United States.
Alvarez said the designation of V. Eugene Robinson is "an
acknowledgement that there are Christian homosexual people in our diocese
and outside of it."
Robinson was designated bishop last week, causing conservative
members of the Anglican Episcopate to abandon a national meeting and ask
world Anglican leaders to intervene in what they called a "pastoral
emergency."
According to Alvarez, "nothing in the faith and order of the church
is altered in this case."
"The spiritual effectiveness of the sacraments is independent of the
subjective condition of those who administer it," he added in a press
release. "The matter of homosexuality is not an extensively treated point
in the Bible."
Although he recognized that the act is "worrisome and annoying" for
some Episcopalians, Alvarez made a call to "maintain the communion and
community of the church."
ICSurrey (England), August 12, 2003
http://icsurreyonline.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0700epsomandbanstead/content_
objectid=13283998_method=full_siteid=53340_headline=-Churchmen-in-gay-row--n
aive--name_page.html
Churchmen in gay row 'naive'
A vicar says Anglican leaders were naive in appointing a homosexual
Canon as a Bishop. But, having done so, they should have stuck to their
guns and not be shaken by a wave of publicity about the appointment.
Rev Richard Hanford, of St Mary's Parish Church Ewell, has given over
four pages in the latest edition of the church magazine to an issue which
has given rise to conflict throughout the Church of England.
And although gay Dr Jeffrey John decided not to take up his
controversial appointment as Bishop of Reading, the row in the UK has been
followed by a similar one in America where a gay clergyman has been
appointed as a Bishop in the Episcopalian Church.
Says Mr Hanford: "I think it was unwise and irresponsible of the
Bishop of Oxford to make such a controversial nomination in his diocese just
as the new Archbishop of Canterbury is starting to get up to speed in the
early stages of his office.
"I have little doubt that a great deal of discussion took place
behind closed doors before the appointment was announced and that everyone
concerned must have gone into it with their eyes wide open.
"Nevertheless, if they thought this was a brave appointment in a
brave new world they seem to me to have been astonishingly naive.
"However, having taken this step, and presumably counted the possible
cost, they should have stuck to their guns and gone ahead.
"We now have the situation of a gay cleric, known to be in a
long-term, stable and celibate relationship, who has had pressure placed
upon him to decline the appointment and has done so.
"It remains a sorry business and the Church of England may come to
regret it. This issue is not going to go away."
Ottawa Citizen, August 12, 2003
1101 Baxter Road, Box 5020, Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3M4 Canada
(E-Mail: letters@thecitizen.southam.ca )( http://www.ottawacitizen.com )
http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=B78DA355-4862-43BC-B9A5-B3B58989FE7C
Alliance plans to force early same-sex vote
Motion aimed at exploiting divisions within Liberal ranks
Bill Curry, The Ottawa Citizen
Aiming to push Liberal divisions into the open and derail the
government's plan to legalize same-sex marriages, the Canadian Alliance will
force a vote on the issue as soon as Parliament returns in September.
Under the government's plan to refer draft legislation to the Supreme
Court prior to its introduction in Parliament, MPs are not likely to vote on
the proposed law until late 2004. However, the Alliance motion could put
the government's plan in jeopardy.
It is expected to be based on a 1999 motion that passed 216-55 with
broad Liberal support, including from Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
The June 8, 1999, motion stated that "marriage is and should remain
the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that
Parliament will take all necessary steps within the jurisdiction of the
Parliament of Canada to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada."
Liberal MP Pat O'Brien said yesterday he was pleased to hear the
Alliance is dusting off the four-year-old motion.
"I will have no problem casting the very same vote that I cast in
1999. I don't know why anybody would, frankly, so it will be interesting,"
said Mr. O'Brien. "I've referred to that vote many times. What's changed?
That's my question and I guess that's what the opposition is asking, what's
changed? I guess the only answer is the courts are driving the process."
Liberal MP Dan McTeague said he also welcomes the Alliance motion.
"It would allow us to put this issue right front and centre upon
return in Parliament," he said. "This, for many people, was the line in the
sand."
Alliance House leader John Reynolds said his party has yet to decide
on the wording of the new motion, but said he hopes it will pressure the
government to change its course by abandoning the word "marriage" in the
proposed legislation.
"These people sometimes don't care what Parliament says, but I would
hope it would certainly give them a strong message," he said. "For most
Canadians I know, it has nothing to do with being anti-gay at all. It's got
to do with the fact that marriage has been a term, as long as anyone could
remember, between a man and a woman. I'm sure there are a lot of gay people
who might be quite happy with a domestic partnership."
Liberal caucus chairman Stan Keyes is also calling on cabinet to drop
the word marriage from the legislation, but dismissed the Alliance motion as
"unconstructive" and "politically simplistic."
Mr. Keyes said he's pushing for the word marriage to be dropped
completely from state-sanctioned unions, even those between a man and a
woman.
"Marriage is for religions to use. It's like the words Kleenex and
tissue. They're interchangeable. 'Do you have a Kleenex?' 'No, I have a
tissue.' 'Are you getting married?' 'No, I'm having a civil union.'
Marriage is universal, but in law, in legislation, when you're creating
definitions, why not use a term that everybody can live with?"
NDP MP Libby Davies said she's very concerned that many Liberal MPs
appear ready to support a motion such as the one proposed by the Alliance.
"Some of the Liberal backbenchers, I think they're really chickening
out," she said. "They're coming up with all kinds of reasons why they can't
support the issue of same sex marriage. I think it is very worrying. To a
lot of people, this is an issue of the rights of a minority and to have it
subject to all of this I think makes it very difficult for people."
Winnipeg Liberal MP Anita Neville echoed Ms. Davies' concerns,
arguing that time should be given to the Supreme Court to study the issue
prior to voting on what she described as a "frivolous" Alliance motion.
"I would certainly hope we're not sidetracked by the Alliance
agenda," she said.
Gay.com U.K., 12 August 2003
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/4856
Lesbian couple attacked at Brighton Pride
A lesbian couple were attacked by two men at this year's Brighton and
Hove Pride, it has emerged.
The couple, aged 18 and 23, were punched in the face just hours
before the event began outside the revenge nightclub in the Old Steine,
Brighton on Saturday.
Officers have labelled the attack homophobic and are now looking for
witnesses to come forward, as the area was busy with pedestrians at the
time.
"It is a real shame two thugs, steeped in ignorance, took it upon
themselves to dish out the kind of prejudice that Pride works hard to stamp
out," David Harvey, chairman of Pride in Brighton and Hove, told the local
media.
One of the attackers was 25 to 30 and wore a white shirt. The other
wore a black shirt.
Although the couple were not seriously injured, one of the women had
to go to the local hospital to attend to her swollen face.
Other than this single attack, Sussex Police praised the organisers
and attendees at this year's event for helping to ensure it was safe and
successful. There were no arrests at the event, which attracted 90,000
people.
Santa Maria Times, August 12, 2003
Box 400, Santa Maria, CA, 93456-0400
(Fax: 805-928-5657 ) ( http://www.santamariatimes.com )
(Online Mailer: http://www.santamariatimes.com/contact/lettertoeditor.html )
http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2003/08/12/sections/opinion/081203le
tters.txt
Letter: Gay marriage cartoon insulting
You have insulted our community with your supposedly satirical
cartoon showing an adulterous couple criticizing gay marriage.
The well-known immoral bias of the media, including the cartoonist,
Margulies, creates its own TV sitcom morality mindset where adultery is
taken for granted. This community takes marriage and family seriously.
We know that there have always been people attracted to the same sex,
children, animals and even corpses. They need compassion and help.
Homosexuals already have legal rights to procure any kind of protection for
their lovers that they wish to dream up. Just don't call it marriage.
Psychologists tell us that the warmth of a good marriage is the best
possible cradle for children; this is where the masculine and feminine role
model show love and respect for one another. It is hard enough for families
to swim upstream through the barrage of kinky sex-saturated images in our
society. Don't let a loud, well-financed group confuse our young even more.
- Barbara Murphy, Santa Maria
2. EAST AFRICAN STANDARD (Kenya) Kenya Archbishop says "homosexuals have no place in the Anglican Church of Kenya"
3. MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE Homophobic Minnesota state senator Lindner is
"moved but unswayed" by Holocaust exhibit on gays
4. ABC NEWS (Australia) Southeast Queensland church votes against gay
ministers
5. NEW VISION (Uganda) US Gays to Aid Ugandans; Integrity USA promises
assistance to a local Ugandan gay chapter, Integrity Uganda (IU), to expand
"into other parts of the country where keen interest has been expressed"
6. ASSOCIATED PRESS Puerto Rican Episcopal bishop supports designation of
gay bishop
7. ICSURREY (England) A vicar says Anglican leaders were naive in
appointing a homosexual Canon as a Bishop. But, having done so, they should
have stuck to their guns and not be shaken by a wave of publicity about the
appointment
8. OTTAWA CITIZEN Canadian Alliance plans to force early same-sex vote;
Motion is aimed at exploiting divisions within Liberal ranks
9. GAY.COM U.K. Lesbian couple attacked by two men at Brighton Pride
Canadian Press, August 12, 2003
http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=8A108A88-8DB3-44B5-8061-8B4E6FE31F74
PM will press on with gay marriage law
Alexander Panetta, Canadian Press
OTTAWA - Brushing aside threats of eternal damnation, Prime Minister
Jean Chretien promised Tuesday to push forward with legislation that would
allow gays and lesbians to marry.
Chretien didn't appear moved by a warning from a Roman Catholic
bishop that his government's same-sex marriage plans will jeopardize his
eternal soul. He said his responsibilities as prime minister aren't defined
by his religion.
"I'm a Catholic and I'm praying," a smiling Chretien said after a
cabinet meeting.
"But I'm the prime minister of Canada. When I'm the prime minister
of Canada, I'm acting as a person responsible for the nation.
"And the problem of my religion, I'll deal with it in other
circumstances."
He said the government plans to proceed with its original timetable:
wait while the Supreme Court examines the draft marriage legislation, then
create a bill and put it to a free vote in the House of Commons.
The legislative process is not expected to begin until after Chretien
retires next year - and perhaps not until after a federal election.
A large group of dissenting Liberals is threatening to defeat the
legislation by voting against it.
Many are pushing for a parallel status for gays and lesbians other
than marriage, perhaps called a civil union.
However, Justice Minister Martin Cauchon said such a status is
unacceptable because it sends the message homosexuals are less than equal.
Some are pushing the government to add a question about civil unions
to the three queries included in the Supreme Court reference, expected to be
heard next year.
A spokesman for Chretien, Jim Munson, said the government doesn't
plan to ask a fourth question.
East African Standard, August 12, 2003
P.O.Box 30080, Nairobi, Kenya
(E-Mail: online@eaststandard.net ) ( http://www.eaststandard.net )
http://www.eastandard.net/headlines/news13082003006.htm
Anglican Church firm on gay weddings
By Francis Openda
Homosexuals have no place in the Anglican Church of Kenya (ACK)
Archbishop, the Most Reverend Benjamin Nzimbi, said yesterday.
"We are closely watching the developments in the Episcopal Church of
USA and other dioceses within the Communion which are blessing same sex
marriages," said Nzimbi.
Nzimbi returned to the country from Episcopal Churches of USA (Ecusa)
General Convention in Minneapolis where he was an observer.
At the Convention, the House of Bishops approved the election of
practising homosexual, the Rev Gene Robinson, as Bishop of New Hampshire
with 62 votes against 43.
Nzimbi, who is the head of ACK, further repeated his earlier stand
that the church is seriously considering cutting links with dioceses, which
go contrary to the stand.
He said ACK will state its final position after a meeting of the 38
primates of the Anglican Communion scheduled for London in October. The
issue of homosexuality in the church will be top on the agenda.
He said while ACK is not supportive of a split in the Anglican
Communion, a lot will depend on " how things are moving forward."
"Any Anglican diocese which has sanctioned or resolved to bless the
same sex marriage has committed a gross theological error and kicked itself
out of the Anglican Communion," he said.
Addressing a news conference at the ACK Garden House, in Nairobi,
Nzimbi said the Anglican Church is fully bound by the 1998 Lambeth
Conference, which recognises the biblical life-long marriage between man and
woman.
Also present was the ACK Provincial Secretary, Bishop William Waqo,
and the Provost of All Saints Cathedral, Peter Karanja.
Nzimbi said the Convention's vote though a majority is contrary to
the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and the Anglican stand on marriage.
"We are greatly saddened by Ecusa General Convention's confirmation
of the appointment of a bishop who is a practising homosexual last week," he
said.
He said while the church is ready to offer all its faithful pastoral
care, it will not compromise on the sanctioning of homosexual or lesbian
marriages.
Nzimbi called on ACK pastors to carefully explain to faithful the
impact of sanctioning same sex marriages.
He said ACK is autonomous "and they can choose whether to help us or
not but this remains our stand."
He said finances or the way of voting should not be linked to belief
in God.
Nzimbi said while the matter could be a justice issue to others, it
remains a moral issue to Kenyans.
"Every part of the body has got its use and let it be used properly
to glorify God," said Nzimbi.
Minneapolis Star Tribune, August 12, 2003
425 Portland Avenue, Minneapolis, MN, 55408
(Fax: 612-673-4359 ) (E-Mail: opinion@startribune.com )
( http://www.startribune.com/ )
http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4038848.html
Lindner moved but unswayed by Holocaust exhibit on gays
Associated Press
Sometimes removing his glasses to squint at the smallest print, state
Rep. Arlon Lindner closely examined each of 28 panels that the U.S.
Holocaust Memorial Museum sent to this YWCA to document the discrimination
homosexuals suffered at the hands of Nazis.
When he was done, Lindner told reporters he has no regrets for
remarks he made in March that outraged some gays and blacks. He stressed
that he believes the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin and "a
perverted lifestyle."
"I pretty much stand by what I said," said Lindner, a Republican from
Corcoran. "I don't feel that I owe an apology to anybody."
During the legislative session, Lindner was accused by Democratic
legislators of ethics violations for saying that Nazi persecution of
homosexuals is part of a "rewriting of history." Lindner's critics grew
madder still when he said he didn't want "to sit around here and wait until
America becomes another African continent," a reference he said applied to
the spread of HIV and AIDS.
The way Lindner recalls those remarks - made in reference to his bill
to repeal state human rights protections for people based on their sexual
orientation - he was only trying to say that homosexuals never suffered to
the extent that Jewish people did.
He came away from his tour Tuesday convinced that he was right,
although he said he was moved by what he saw and read in the exhibit, called
"Nazi Persecution of Homosexuals 1933-1945."
Still, the man who invited Lindner to take the tour isn't so sure
that the Christian conservative hasn't softened his views.
Stephen Silberfarb, executive director of the Jewish Community
Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, walked alongside the
representative at every step through the display. The two exchanged remarks
on topics ranging from Nazi leaders who were themselves gay to the propriety
of anti-sodomy laws, which Lindner defended.
Silberfarb said he believes Lindner's original comments implied he
didn't believe any persecution occurred.
"I think we've concluded today that it did happen, and to that degree
I think progress has been made," Silberfarb said.
He also gave Lindner credit for publicly touring the exhibit, saying
it showed a commitment to the principle of civil debate.
For his part, Lindner showed up to the YWCA early and alone. He then
made his way to the basement display where he patiently allowed reporters to
attach microphones to his shirt before he began to read each panel, in
order.
Though Lindner said little as he read, in the background his March
comments could occasionally be heard, playing on a continuous loop on a
monitor set up for the display.
The exhibit is a collection of drawings, photographs and original
German documents detailing Nazi treatment of homosexuals. Local organizers
pressed to attract the exhibit in the wake of press attention to Lindner's
comments.
It documents a campaign that resulted in the arrest of about 100,000
gay men - about half of whom were sent to prison. Thousands of those were
sent to concentration camps, where an unknown number died. Those figures,
Lindner said, support his original thoughts. "They go after 100,000.
That's a small number compared to 2 million," he said, referring to
estimates of the total number of German homosexuals.
When he was all done, in the drawl that gives away his Texas roots,
Lindner said he plans to try again to push his bill and to do what he can do
to "try to protect the family and children that are influenced by this."
Said Lindner: "I'm a Christian and God knows us better than we know
ourselves. And it's in the Bible that homosexuality is a sin and it's wrong
and it's a perverted lifestyle. I don't try to go against my maker."
ABC News (Australia), 13 August 2003
http://www.abc.net.au/brisbane/news/200308/s922933.htm
SE Qld church votes against gay ministers
Leaders of the Uniting church in south-east Queensland have rejected
their national body's decision to allow homosexuals to be ordained as
ministers.
About 100 church members met in Beenleigh south of Brisbane last
night and voted to maintain the status quo, which blocks homosexuals from
holding any positions of leadership.
The Reverend Ray Reddicliffe says parishioners wanted to express
their strong disappointment and deep regret.
"While it is conceivable that could happen, I think at this stage
it's very clear that most people, that's not how they would like to see it,"
he said.
New Vision, August 12, 2003
P.O. Box 9815, Kampala, Uganda
(E-Mail: nvision@newvision.co.ug ) ( http://www.newvision.co.ug )
http://allafrica.com/stories/200308120748.html
US Gays to Aid Ugandans
John Kakande
Kampala - Integrity USA, an American organisation of homosexuals, has
promised assistance to a local Ugandan gay chapter, Integrity Uganda (IU),
to expand "into other parts of the country where keen interest has been
expressed."
Integrity USA has also promised to give assistance to IU to organise
a "Pan-African conference of lesbian and gay Anglicans prior to the next
scheduled Lambeth Conference in 2008."
According to documents seen by The New Vision, the President of
Integrity USA, the Rev. Michael W. Hopkins, the Rector of St. George's
Church, Glenn Dale, Maryland, visited Uganda discreetly for two-weeks and
held discussions with the IU in Uganda, an organisation of gays, lesbians
and bisexuals.
"A goal of Integrity/Kampala is to sponsor a pan-African conference
of lesbian and gay Anglicans prior to the next scheduled Lambeth Conference
in 2008. Integrity USA will provide assistance to this indigenous effort,"
the document says.
Hopkins' visit in June last year was the first to Uganda and Africa.
He revealed that while in Uganda, he visited the Anglican Martyrs shrine
where they had prayers on June 10, 2003.
Associated Press, August 12, 2003
http://www.puertoricowow.com/html/general-detail.asp?amaspHidden_listActive=
true&amaspField_newshd=Puerto%20Rican%20bishop%20supports%20designation%20of
%20gay%20bishop%20&amaspHidden_newshd_dataType=string
Puerto Rican bishop supports designation of gay bishop
SAN JUAN (AP) - Puerto Rican Episcopal Church Monsignor David Alvarez
said Tuesday that he supports the designation of the first openly homosexual
bishop in the United States.
Alvarez said the designation of V. Eugene Robinson is "an
acknowledgement that there are Christian homosexual people in our diocese
and outside of it."
Robinson was designated bishop last week, causing conservative
members of the Anglican Episcopate to abandon a national meeting and ask
world Anglican leaders to intervene in what they called a "pastoral
emergency."
According to Alvarez, "nothing in the faith and order of the church
is altered in this case."
"The spiritual effectiveness of the sacraments is independent of the
subjective condition of those who administer it," he added in a press
release. "The matter of homosexuality is not an extensively treated point
in the Bible."
Although he recognized that the act is "worrisome and annoying" for
some Episcopalians, Alvarez made a call to "maintain the communion and
community of the church."
ICSurrey (England), August 12, 2003
http://icsurreyonline.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0700epsomandbanstead/content_
objectid=13283998_method=full_siteid=53340_headline=-Churchmen-in-gay-row--n
aive--name_page.html
Churchmen in gay row 'naive'
A vicar says Anglican leaders were naive in appointing a homosexual
Canon as a Bishop. But, having done so, they should have stuck to their
guns and not be shaken by a wave of publicity about the appointment.
Rev Richard Hanford, of St Mary's Parish Church Ewell, has given over
four pages in the latest edition of the church magazine to an issue which
has given rise to conflict throughout the Church of England.
And although gay Dr Jeffrey John decided not to take up his
controversial appointment as Bishop of Reading, the row in the UK has been
followed by a similar one in America where a gay clergyman has been
appointed as a Bishop in the Episcopalian Church.
Says Mr Hanford: "I think it was unwise and irresponsible of the
Bishop of Oxford to make such a controversial nomination in his diocese just
as the new Archbishop of Canterbury is starting to get up to speed in the
early stages of his office.
"I have little doubt that a great deal of discussion took place
behind closed doors before the appointment was announced and that everyone
concerned must have gone into it with their eyes wide open.
"Nevertheless, if they thought this was a brave appointment in a
brave new world they seem to me to have been astonishingly naive.
"However, having taken this step, and presumably counted the possible
cost, they should have stuck to their guns and gone ahead.
"We now have the situation of a gay cleric, known to be in a
long-term, stable and celibate relationship, who has had pressure placed
upon him to decline the appointment and has done so.
"It remains a sorry business and the Church of England may come to
regret it. This issue is not going to go away."
Ottawa Citizen, August 12, 2003
1101 Baxter Road, Box 5020, Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3M4 Canada
(E-Mail: letters@thecitizen.southam.ca )( http://www.ottawacitizen.com )
http://canada.com/national/story.asp?id=B78DA355-4862-43BC-B9A5-B3B58989FE7C
Alliance plans to force early same-sex vote
Motion aimed at exploiting divisions within Liberal ranks
Bill Curry, The Ottawa Citizen
Aiming to push Liberal divisions into the open and derail the
government's plan to legalize same-sex marriages, the Canadian Alliance will
force a vote on the issue as soon as Parliament returns in September.
Under the government's plan to refer draft legislation to the Supreme
Court prior to its introduction in Parliament, MPs are not likely to vote on
the proposed law until late 2004. However, the Alliance motion could put
the government's plan in jeopardy.
It is expected to be based on a 1999 motion that passed 216-55 with
broad Liberal support, including from Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
The June 8, 1999, motion stated that "marriage is and should remain
the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that
Parliament will take all necessary steps within the jurisdiction of the
Parliament of Canada to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada."
Liberal MP Pat O'Brien said yesterday he was pleased to hear the
Alliance is dusting off the four-year-old motion.
"I will have no problem casting the very same vote that I cast in
1999. I don't know why anybody would, frankly, so it will be interesting,"
said Mr. O'Brien. "I've referred to that vote many times. What's changed?
That's my question and I guess that's what the opposition is asking, what's
changed? I guess the only answer is the courts are driving the process."
Liberal MP Dan McTeague said he also welcomes the Alliance motion.
"It would allow us to put this issue right front and centre upon
return in Parliament," he said. "This, for many people, was the line in the
sand."
Alliance House leader John Reynolds said his party has yet to decide
on the wording of the new motion, but said he hopes it will pressure the
government to change its course by abandoning the word "marriage" in the
proposed legislation.
"These people sometimes don't care what Parliament says, but I would
hope it would certainly give them a strong message," he said. "For most
Canadians I know, it has nothing to do with being anti-gay at all. It's got
to do with the fact that marriage has been a term, as long as anyone could
remember, between a man and a woman. I'm sure there are a lot of gay people
who might be quite happy with a domestic partnership."
Liberal caucus chairman Stan Keyes is also calling on cabinet to drop
the word marriage from the legislation, but dismissed the Alliance motion as
"unconstructive" and "politically simplistic."
Mr. Keyes said he's pushing for the word marriage to be dropped
completely from state-sanctioned unions, even those between a man and a
woman.
"Marriage is for religions to use. It's like the words Kleenex and
tissue. They're interchangeable. 'Do you have a Kleenex?' 'No, I have a
tissue.' 'Are you getting married?' 'No, I'm having a civil union.'
Marriage is universal, but in law, in legislation, when you're creating
definitions, why not use a term that everybody can live with?"
NDP MP Libby Davies said she's very concerned that many Liberal MPs
appear ready to support a motion such as the one proposed by the Alliance.
"Some of the Liberal backbenchers, I think they're really chickening
out," she said. "They're coming up with all kinds of reasons why they can't
support the issue of same sex marriage. I think it is very worrying. To a
lot of people, this is an issue of the rights of a minority and to have it
subject to all of this I think makes it very difficult for people."
Winnipeg Liberal MP Anita Neville echoed Ms. Davies' concerns,
arguing that time should be given to the Supreme Court to study the issue
prior to voting on what she described as a "frivolous" Alliance motion.
"I would certainly hope we're not sidetracked by the Alliance
agenda," she said.
Gay.com U.K., 12 August 2003
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/4856
Lesbian couple attacked at Brighton Pride
A lesbian couple were attacked by two men at this year's Brighton and
Hove Pride, it has emerged.
The couple, aged 18 and 23, were punched in the face just hours
before the event began outside the revenge nightclub in the Old Steine,
Brighton on Saturday.
Officers have labelled the attack homophobic and are now looking for
witnesses to come forward, as the area was busy with pedestrians at the
time.
"It is a real shame two thugs, steeped in ignorance, took it upon
themselves to dish out the kind of prejudice that Pride works hard to stamp
out," David Harvey, chairman of Pride in Brighton and Hove, told the local
media.
One of the attackers was 25 to 30 and wore a white shirt. The other
wore a black shirt.
Although the couple were not seriously injured, one of the women had
to go to the local hospital to attend to her swollen face.
Other than this single attack, Sussex Police praised the organisers
and attendees at this year's event for helping to ensure it was safe and
successful. There were no arrests at the event, which attracted 90,000
people.
Santa Maria Times, August 12, 2003
Box 400, Santa Maria, CA, 93456-0400
(Fax: 805-928-5657 ) ( http://www.santamariatimes.com )
(Online Mailer: http://www.santamariatimes.com/contact/lettertoeditor.html )
http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2003/08/12/sections/opinion/081203le
tters.txt
Letter: Gay marriage cartoon insulting
You have insulted our community with your supposedly satirical
cartoon showing an adulterous couple criticizing gay marriage.
The well-known immoral bias of the media, including the cartoonist,
Margulies, creates its own TV sitcom morality mindset where adultery is
taken for granted. This community takes marriage and family seriously.
We know that there have always been people attracted to the same sex,
children, animals and even corpses. They need compassion and help.
Homosexuals already have legal rights to procure any kind of protection for
their lovers that they wish to dream up. Just don't call it marriage.
Psychologists tell us that the warmth of a good marriage is the best
possible cradle for children; this is where the masculine and feminine role
model show love and respect for one another. It is hard enough for families
to swim upstream through the barrage of kinky sex-saturated images in our
society. Don't let a loud, well-financed group confuse our young even more.
- Barbara Murphy, Santa Maria
Boyd may let gay-rights club meet only after school hours
Louisville Courier-Journal, August 12, 2003
525 W. Broadway, Louisville, KY, 40202
(Fax: 502-582-4075 ) (E-Mail: cjletter@louisv02.gannett.com )
( http://www.courier-journal.com/ )
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2003/08/12ky/wir-front-gay0812-1280
1.html
Boyd may let gay-rights club meet only after school hours
By Mark Pitsch, The Courier-Journal, mpitsch@courier-journal.com
Seeking to end a controversy over a gay-rights student group, the
Boyd County School Board is expected to give final approval next week to a
new policy on student activities.
The board also will ask a federal judge to lift an injunction that
allows the Boyd County High School Gay-Straight Alliance to meet at school
before or after school hours or during the lunch period.
Under the new policy, the alliance could meet only after school
hours. The board contends the policy treats the alliance the same as other
noncurricular clubs.
But the American Civil Liberties Union, which has sued the district
on behalf of the gay-rights group, and other observers question whether the
policy amounts to equal treatment as required by the federal Equal Access
Act, and whether it complies with a Kentucky law giving school-based
teacher-parent councils the authority over extracurricular matters.
The board, which gave preliminary approval to the policy last month,
is scheduled to meet Monday. Even though classes for the new year started
last week, the policy would not take effect until the injunction is lifted.
"On the face of it, the (policy's) terms seem consistent with the
Equal Access Act," said Sam Marcosson, a civil-rights and constitutional-law
professor at the University of Louisville. "But the big question in all of
this is not what their policy says on its face but what is actually
happening in the schools. So the question is how will this be enforced, and
I don't see how this (policy) really changes much."
Adopting a new activities policy and other policies governing
attendance, excused absences, harassment and use of school facilities by
community groups is the latest response by the school district to the
alliance, which is seeking recognition as a school club and permission to
meet at the school.
"What we're trying to do is provide a fair forum for all
noncurricular activities," said Winter Huff, a Somerset lawyer who helped
draft the new policies.
Kaye King, an English teacher at the high school who is the
alliance's adviser, said school district officials showed teachers new
additions to the policy last week requiring parental permission to
participate in a club and prohibiting the district's insurance policy from
covering activities that take place after school.
Those additions could be "roadblocks" to meetings of the alliance,
she said.
Superintendent Bill Capehart and school board chairwoman Sheri Bryan
didn't return calls seeking comment yesterday.
In October, the high school's teacher-parent council voted to let the
alliance meet at school. But the action prompted a school boycott and
opposition from local ministers and others.
The school board voted in December to ban all clubs from meeting at
the high school and pledged to write a new policy on clubs. But a month
later the ACLU sued the district on behalf of the alliance, saying the high
school violated the Equal Access Act by letting some noncurricular clubs
meet despite the ban while not allowing the alliance to meet.
The district denied the allegations, which included claims that it
violated the students' rights to free speech and equal protection, and
violated the Kentucky Education Reform Act by overturning the school council
decision.
U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning issued a preliminary injunction
in April saying the school had violated the Equal Access Act, and he ordered
the school to let the alliance meet. He ruled that the student group had "a
strong likelihood" of winning its case.
Bunning also ordered the two sides to mediate their differences, but
the ACLU and the district couldn't come to an agreement. That set the stage
for the new policy.
Huff said the district plans to take the new policy to Bunning and
ask him to lift the injunction.
"It is the fulfillment of an issue that has existed since before this
specific controversy, and that is to what extent are activities other than
course work appropriate during the school day and to what extent does the
school district need to be involved in that," Huff said. "What the district
is saying is we want the school day to fulfill (academic) purposes, we want
the school day to be spent on things that are instructional or curricular."
She said that noncurricular clubs such as the alliance, the Bible
Club and the Key Club community service group would be allowed to meet at
school on the same terms, and that she believes the policy is in compliance
with the Equal Access Act.
The policy would allow noncurricular activities to take place at the
school only after school hours, and would define the school day from
7:30a.m. to the loading of school buses around 4p.m.
King, the alliance's adviser, said that after Bunning issued the
injunction last spring, the group met Friday mornings before the 8 a.m.
start of classes because it was the most convenient time.
She said that the alliance plans to hold its first meeting of the
fall semester on Friday before school, and that she was assured by Capehart
the group can meet at that time until Bunning lifts the injunction.
"I never would have dreamed it would have lasted this long to start
with," King said. "The kids are not going to give up."
Huff said it's conceivable that noncurricular clubs could meet before
7:30, but that a practical question exists as to whether school officials
would be available to open the building before then.
Teresa Cornette, a Boyd County school board member, said last month
that school employees wouldn't be able to serve as advisers to noncurricular
clubs. But the policy "does not prohibit teachers from being involved in
noncurricular activities," according to a statement from the school board.
Unlike curriculum-related clubs and other activities that the
district considers academic or athletic, however, teachers won't be paid by
the district for their service, Huff said.
Previously, teachers were paid a small stipend for advising most
clubs, King said. As adviser to the Human Rights Club, King received $200 a
year, she said. The pay for each teacher varied depending upon how long a
teacher advised a club, she said.
The policy also seeks to make a distinction between school-sponsored
activities and those that are not sanctioned by the school. Sponsored
activities include those that relate to the curriculum, athletics and
cheerleading, and other activities related to "academic enrichment."
Such activities could meet during the school day - or allow students
to be excused from school for a field trip or sporting event. Students also
could be excused to attend noncurricular activities if participation could
be "of direct assistance" in getting a college scholarship or is approved by
the principal.
"When you are looking at the policy on excused absences, you're
really focusing on the nature of the activity and not the nature of the club
or organization," Huff said.
But the ACLU and others said the policy makes it unclear whether the
alliance is being treated equally.
"We don't feel like the policy is in line with what the judge has to
say," said Chris Hampton, public education associate for the ACLU's Lesbian
and Gay Rights Project.
Hampton added that despite the breakdown in talks between the
district and the ACLU, the two sides are still discussing their differences.
Marcosson said the school board is "trying to do the minimum" to
comply with the Equal Access Act.
"They're doing as little as they can and being as restrictive as they
can to all clubs ... for the sake of doing as little as possible to make
space available to and accommodate the Gay-Straight Alliance," he said.
Carolyn Bratt, a University of Kentucky law professor who works on
gender issues, said she doubts the policy would prompt Bunning to lift the
injunction because it grew out of a desire to stop the alliance from
meeting.
"No matter how they try to dress this up, it is motivated by an
attempt to exclude the Gay-Straight Alliance," Bratt said. "I don't think
the court is going to forget where this all started. It started from an
impermissible intention."
Tom Hutton, a lawyer with the National School Boards Association,
said the policy appears to treat the alliance the same as other
noncurricular clubs. But he said that by also trying to define
school-sponsored activities, the district needs to be wary of sponsoring
noncurricular organizations - such as a chess club, for example - and
treating them differently from other noncurricular clubs like the alliance.
The key would be in how the policy is implemented, he said.
"The only question that I would have - and we won't know the answer
until it plays out - is: Is the definition of school-sponsored activities
broader than noncurricular activities so that there's some sort of school
groups that would be treated differently than the Gay-Straight Alliance or
the Bible Club?" Hutton said.
Huff acknowledged that implementation of the policy would be key to
its success. "I realize we're always going to be second-guessed, and
there's not much I can do about it except to reiterate these are not new
issues," she said.
Meanwhile, Susan Weston, executive director of the Kentucky
Association of School Councils, said the board is setting policy on issues -
such as school space - that are supposed to be governed by school councils
under the Kentucky Education Reform Act.
"I think the board is jumping in and making policy on extracurricular
programs, which is not going to fly," Weston said. "They're making policy
on extracurricular programs when the law gives that power to school
councils."
She said the Boyd County High School teacher-parent council could
disregard the school board's activity policy and adopt one of its own.
"What's in council policy simply trumps board policy," Weston said.
But Huff said the law about the authority of school councils
"concerns school-sponsored extracurricular activities. We maintain that is
not the same as noncurricular activities."
Brad Hughes, a spokesman for the Kentucky School Board Association,
said the group's policy and legal experts were reviewing the policy.
Kevin Noland, general counsel for the Kentucky Department of
Education, said state law is unclear on whether school boards or school
councils have final responsibility for noncurricular activities.
"It's one of those where both sides have an argument to make and it's
not adequately addressed in the statute," Noland said.
525 W. Broadway, Louisville, KY, 40202
(Fax: 502-582-4075 ) (E-Mail: cjletter@louisv02.gannett.com )
( http://www.courier-journal.com/ )
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2003/08/12ky/wir-front-gay0812-1280
1.html
Boyd may let gay-rights club meet only after school hours
By Mark Pitsch, The Courier-Journal, mpitsch@courier-journal.com
Seeking to end a controversy over a gay-rights student group, the
Boyd County School Board is expected to give final approval next week to a
new policy on student activities.
The board also will ask a federal judge to lift an injunction that
allows the Boyd County High School Gay-Straight Alliance to meet at school
before or after school hours or during the lunch period.
Under the new policy, the alliance could meet only after school
hours. The board contends the policy treats the alliance the same as other
noncurricular clubs.
But the American Civil Liberties Union, which has sued the district
on behalf of the gay-rights group, and other observers question whether the
policy amounts to equal treatment as required by the federal Equal Access
Act, and whether it complies with a Kentucky law giving school-based
teacher-parent councils the authority over extracurricular matters.
The board, which gave preliminary approval to the policy last month,
is scheduled to meet Monday. Even though classes for the new year started
last week, the policy would not take effect until the injunction is lifted.
"On the face of it, the (policy's) terms seem consistent with the
Equal Access Act," said Sam Marcosson, a civil-rights and constitutional-law
professor at the University of Louisville. "But the big question in all of
this is not what their policy says on its face but what is actually
happening in the schools. So the question is how will this be enforced, and
I don't see how this (policy) really changes much."
Adopting a new activities policy and other policies governing
attendance, excused absences, harassment and use of school facilities by
community groups is the latest response by the school district to the
alliance, which is seeking recognition as a school club and permission to
meet at the school.
"What we're trying to do is provide a fair forum for all
noncurricular activities," said Winter Huff, a Somerset lawyer who helped
draft the new policies.
Kaye King, an English teacher at the high school who is the
alliance's adviser, said school district officials showed teachers new
additions to the policy last week requiring parental permission to
participate in a club and prohibiting the district's insurance policy from
covering activities that take place after school.
Those additions could be "roadblocks" to meetings of the alliance,
she said.
Superintendent Bill Capehart and school board chairwoman Sheri Bryan
didn't return calls seeking comment yesterday.
In October, the high school's teacher-parent council voted to let the
alliance meet at school. But the action prompted a school boycott and
opposition from local ministers and others.
The school board voted in December to ban all clubs from meeting at
the high school and pledged to write a new policy on clubs. But a month
later the ACLU sued the district on behalf of the alliance, saying the high
school violated the Equal Access Act by letting some noncurricular clubs
meet despite the ban while not allowing the alliance to meet.
The district denied the allegations, which included claims that it
violated the students' rights to free speech and equal protection, and
violated the Kentucky Education Reform Act by overturning the school council
decision.
U.S. District Judge David L. Bunning issued a preliminary injunction
in April saying the school had violated the Equal Access Act, and he ordered
the school to let the alliance meet. He ruled that the student group had "a
strong likelihood" of winning its case.
Bunning also ordered the two sides to mediate their differences, but
the ACLU and the district couldn't come to an agreement. That set the stage
for the new policy.
Huff said the district plans to take the new policy to Bunning and
ask him to lift the injunction.
"It is the fulfillment of an issue that has existed since before this
specific controversy, and that is to what extent are activities other than
course work appropriate during the school day and to what extent does the
school district need to be involved in that," Huff said. "What the district
is saying is we want the school day to fulfill (academic) purposes, we want
the school day to be spent on things that are instructional or curricular."
She said that noncurricular clubs such as the alliance, the Bible
Club and the Key Club community service group would be allowed to meet at
school on the same terms, and that she believes the policy is in compliance
with the Equal Access Act.
The policy would allow noncurricular activities to take place at the
school only after school hours, and would define the school day from
7:30a.m. to the loading of school buses around 4p.m.
King, the alliance's adviser, said that after Bunning issued the
injunction last spring, the group met Friday mornings before the 8 a.m.
start of classes because it was the most convenient time.
She said that the alliance plans to hold its first meeting of the
fall semester on Friday before school, and that she was assured by Capehart
the group can meet at that time until Bunning lifts the injunction.
"I never would have dreamed it would have lasted this long to start
with," King said. "The kids are not going to give up."
Huff said it's conceivable that noncurricular clubs could meet before
7:30, but that a practical question exists as to whether school officials
would be available to open the building before then.
Teresa Cornette, a Boyd County school board member, said last month
that school employees wouldn't be able to serve as advisers to noncurricular
clubs. But the policy "does not prohibit teachers from being involved in
noncurricular activities," according to a statement from the school board.
Unlike curriculum-related clubs and other activities that the
district considers academic or athletic, however, teachers won't be paid by
the district for their service, Huff said.
Previously, teachers were paid a small stipend for advising most
clubs, King said. As adviser to the Human Rights Club, King received $200 a
year, she said. The pay for each teacher varied depending upon how long a
teacher advised a club, she said.
The policy also seeks to make a distinction between school-sponsored
activities and those that are not sanctioned by the school. Sponsored
activities include those that relate to the curriculum, athletics and
cheerleading, and other activities related to "academic enrichment."
Such activities could meet during the school day - or allow students
to be excused from school for a field trip or sporting event. Students also
could be excused to attend noncurricular activities if participation could
be "of direct assistance" in getting a college scholarship or is approved by
the principal.
"When you are looking at the policy on excused absences, you're
really focusing on the nature of the activity and not the nature of the club
or organization," Huff said.
But the ACLU and others said the policy makes it unclear whether the
alliance is being treated equally.
"We don't feel like the policy is in line with what the judge has to
say," said Chris Hampton, public education associate for the ACLU's Lesbian
and Gay Rights Project.
Hampton added that despite the breakdown in talks between the
district and the ACLU, the two sides are still discussing their differences.
Marcosson said the school board is "trying to do the minimum" to
comply with the Equal Access Act.
"They're doing as little as they can and being as restrictive as they
can to all clubs ... for the sake of doing as little as possible to make
space available to and accommodate the Gay-Straight Alliance," he said.
Carolyn Bratt, a University of Kentucky law professor who works on
gender issues, said she doubts the policy would prompt Bunning to lift the
injunction because it grew out of a desire to stop the alliance from
meeting.
"No matter how they try to dress this up, it is motivated by an
attempt to exclude the Gay-Straight Alliance," Bratt said. "I don't think
the court is going to forget where this all started. It started from an
impermissible intention."
Tom Hutton, a lawyer with the National School Boards Association,
said the policy appears to treat the alliance the same as other
noncurricular clubs. But he said that by also trying to define
school-sponsored activities, the district needs to be wary of sponsoring
noncurricular organizations - such as a chess club, for example - and
treating them differently from other noncurricular clubs like the alliance.
The key would be in how the policy is implemented, he said.
"The only question that I would have - and we won't know the answer
until it plays out - is: Is the definition of school-sponsored activities
broader than noncurricular activities so that there's some sort of school
groups that would be treated differently than the Gay-Straight Alliance or
the Bible Club?" Hutton said.
Huff acknowledged that implementation of the policy would be key to
its success. "I realize we're always going to be second-guessed, and
there's not much I can do about it except to reiterate these are not new
issues," she said.
Meanwhile, Susan Weston, executive director of the Kentucky
Association of School Councils, said the board is setting policy on issues -
such as school space - that are supposed to be governed by school councils
under the Kentucky Education Reform Act.
"I think the board is jumping in and making policy on extracurricular
programs, which is not going to fly," Weston said. "They're making policy
on extracurricular programs when the law gives that power to school
councils."
She said the Boyd County High School teacher-parent council could
disregard the school board's activity policy and adopt one of its own.
"What's in council policy simply trumps board policy," Weston said.
But Huff said the law about the authority of school councils
"concerns school-sponsored extracurricular activities. We maintain that is
not the same as noncurricular activities."
Brad Hughes, a spokesman for the Kentucky School Board Association,
said the group's policy and legal experts were reviewing the policy.
Kevin Noland, general counsel for the Kentucky Department of
Education, said state law is unclear on whether school boards or school
councils have final responsibility for noncurricular activities.
"It's one of those where both sides have an argument to make and it's
not adequately addressed in the statute," Noland said.
A Schism Averted? By Harvey Cox
Wall Street Journal, August 12, 2003
200 Liberty Street, New York, NY, 10281
(Fax: 212-416-2658 ) (E-Mail: letter.editor@edit.wsj.com )
( http://www.wsj.com )
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB106064982541175100-search,00.html
A Schism Averted?
By Harvey Cox
Once again, the Episcopal Church has diffused [defused?] a major
crisis in - there's only one way to put it - a very Episcopalian way.
By confirming Bishop Gene Robinson, a gay man, the Episcopal Church
has done the other denominations a great favor. It has boldly stood up to a
difficult issue, and the signs are good that it will avoid a major schism -
and not for the first time.
The Episcopalian record is encouraging. When Baptists and Methodists
and Presbyterians split into northern and southern contingents over slavery
in the 19th century, the Episcopalian church did not. When some
Episcopalians quoted "Let women keep silent in your churches," and
threatened secession to oppose the ordination of women priests, a handful of
parishes left, but the church stayed together. When the Rev. Barbara Harris
was consecrated as the first woman bishop, more rumblings about schism were
heard, but nothing serious came of it, and now the petite Bishop Harris sips
tea with her fellow Anglican prelates at Lambeth Palace. When other
churches might have fragmented into bitter subsects, Episcopalians agreed to
disagree, and they have preserved the decentralized unity of the 70
million-member, worldwide Anglican communion.
Episcopalians handle deep disagreement better than most.
How do they do it? As they never tire of reminding the rest of us,
theirs is a "bridge church." It combines the Reformation's reliance on the
Bible with a strong Catholic emphasis on tradition. It also recognizes
reason and experience as sources of authority. Historically, looking to all
of these elements together has enabled Anglicans to maintain a strong but
supple authority, and to handle conflicting interpretations without
excommunicating anyone.
When one of these pillars is asserted without being balanced by the
others, however, there is always trouble. The opponents of Bishop
Robinson's confirmation who quoted Bible verses during the discussion in
Minneapolis must have known they had a weak case. The same word, usually
translated as "abomination," which in the Hebrew Scriptures is frequently
applied to certain homosexual acts, is also used to condemn eating any pork
product or even touching the skin of a pig. Those who enjoy crisp bacon
with their fried eggs or a game of touch football on the beach should take
notice. The trouble with flinging out texts is that everyone is selective
about what to quote and what not to. Not only did St. Paul tell women to be
silent in the churches, he also told slaves to obey their masters.
Opponents of emancipation and of women's ordination often cited these
verses, but this only illustrates clearly that we need to rely not just on
the biblical text itself but also, as we do in constitutional law, on the
history of its interpretation.
What about tradition? The opponents of Bishop Robinson also cited
"the tradition of the church" to oppose him. But tradition means "handing
over"; it refers not just what has happened in the past, but also to what is
going on now. Christians believe that God continues to be active in the
church and leads his people into new truth. At the Minneapolis meeting
Bishop Robinson said God did not stop revealing his will when the scriptural
canon was closed. This is an insight drawn from the "Catholic" side of the
Episcopal heritage. It was brilliantly articulated in the 19th century by
John Henry Newman, an Anglican who became a Roman Catholic, in his
celebrated work "An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine." Newman
believed that the truths imbedded in biblical doctrines only gradually come
to light over the centuries as the church faced new challenges. The
farewell message of an earlier Pastor Robinson, as he sent the Pilgrim
fathers (who were of course Anglicans), off for the new world were,
"Remember, God has yet new light and truth to break forth from his holy
word." It is a sound insight. Episcopalians, like most Christians, are
Trinitarians. They believe the Divine Spirit, which guides the church
today, is just as divine as the Father and the Son. Consequently, the
living tradition of the church, when taken in tandem with the Bible and with
past tradition, must also be recognized as a valid expression of authority.
Reason also has a role to play, although never on its own. It must
always be guided and corrected by Scripture and tradition. It is clear to
any reasonable person today, for example, that when the biblical
prohibitions against non-reproductive sex were first enunciated, the
population problem was the reverse of what it is today. Most children died
in infancy, plagues and natural disasters struck frequently, and there was
always the possibility that the tribe itself could perish. Every drop of
semen had to be directed toward replenishing the race. This is hardly our
issue today.
As for experience, another pillar of authority, all we have to do is
look around us. In the last decades many gay and lesbian people, including
the Christians among them, no longer feel they have to pretend or
dissimulate. They are now part of our lives. They fix our TV's, sit in the
halls of Congress, teach in our schools and colleges and write the books we
read. The vast majority of them shun the gay demimonde. They are too busy
doing cancer research and practicing their cellos. In most of these fields
they can rise to whatever level their ability and dedication permit. Most
of us would prefer to be in the hands of a skilled gay brain surgeon or
airline pilot rather than be left to the mercy of a straight one who is just
learning the ropes. Luckily we are spared that choice today. Should the
church remain the only exception to what we experience and appreciate every
day in the other areas of or lives?
For years now many local churches of different denominations have
identified themselves as "open and welcoming" congregations. What they all
report is that after an initial flurry, soon gay and lesbian members simply
attend communion, sing in the choir, present their adopted children for
baptism, sign up for spiritual retreats, staff the food pantry and attend
Bible study and prayer groups. They do not like to be singled out as
different, nor do they want to belong to a "gay church." They want to be
treated with dignity and respect, as we all do, while they try to meet their
own spiritual needs and follow the teachings of Jesus (who never uttered a
syllable about homosexuality) to care for the wounded, feed the hungry and
show compassion to the broken-hearted.
Several other denominations have been stalling for years on the
status of gay Christians in the church. Should they be welcomed at all, or
barred at the door? Should they be content with second-class citizenship
and excluded from leadership? Should we go back to pretending they are not
there at all when everyone knows they are? We as Christians need to get
past this enervating debate so that we can move on to other pressing issues
that require the churches' attention, such as the growing gap between the
rich and the poor - about which Jesus did have something very clear to say.
I am not an Episcopalian, but I commend that church for the
deliberate way it proceeded to come to a decision about the nagging
questions that have paralyzed so many other churches. The rest of us have
been set a good example.
. Mr. Cox, Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard, is the author of
"Common Prayers: Faith, Family and a Christian's Journey Through the Jewish
Year" (Mariner, 2002).
200 Liberty Street, New York, NY, 10281
(Fax: 212-416-2658 ) (E-Mail: letter.editor@edit.wsj.com )
( http://www.wsj.com )
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB106064982541175100-search,00.html
A Schism Averted?
By Harvey Cox
Once again, the Episcopal Church has diffused [defused?] a major
crisis in - there's only one way to put it - a very Episcopalian way.
By confirming Bishop Gene Robinson, a gay man, the Episcopal Church
has done the other denominations a great favor. It has boldly stood up to a
difficult issue, and the signs are good that it will avoid a major schism -
and not for the first time.
The Episcopalian record is encouraging. When Baptists and Methodists
and Presbyterians split into northern and southern contingents over slavery
in the 19th century, the Episcopalian church did not. When some
Episcopalians quoted "Let women keep silent in your churches," and
threatened secession to oppose the ordination of women priests, a handful of
parishes left, but the church stayed together. When the Rev. Barbara Harris
was consecrated as the first woman bishop, more rumblings about schism were
heard, but nothing serious came of it, and now the petite Bishop Harris sips
tea with her fellow Anglican prelates at Lambeth Palace. When other
churches might have fragmented into bitter subsects, Episcopalians agreed to
disagree, and they have preserved the decentralized unity of the 70
million-member, worldwide Anglican communion.
Episcopalians handle deep disagreement better than most.
How do they do it? As they never tire of reminding the rest of us,
theirs is a "bridge church." It combines the Reformation's reliance on the
Bible with a strong Catholic emphasis on tradition. It also recognizes
reason and experience as sources of authority. Historically, looking to all
of these elements together has enabled Anglicans to maintain a strong but
supple authority, and to handle conflicting interpretations without
excommunicating anyone.
When one of these pillars is asserted without being balanced by the
others, however, there is always trouble. The opponents of Bishop
Robinson's confirmation who quoted Bible verses during the discussion in
Minneapolis must have known they had a weak case. The same word, usually
translated as "abomination," which in the Hebrew Scriptures is frequently
applied to certain homosexual acts, is also used to condemn eating any pork
product or even touching the skin of a pig. Those who enjoy crisp bacon
with their fried eggs or a game of touch football on the beach should take
notice. The trouble with flinging out texts is that everyone is selective
about what to quote and what not to. Not only did St. Paul tell women to be
silent in the churches, he also told slaves to obey their masters.
Opponents of emancipation and of women's ordination often cited these
verses, but this only illustrates clearly that we need to rely not just on
the biblical text itself but also, as we do in constitutional law, on the
history of its interpretation.
What about tradition? The opponents of Bishop Robinson also cited
"the tradition of the church" to oppose him. But tradition means "handing
over"; it refers not just what has happened in the past, but also to what is
going on now. Christians believe that God continues to be active in the
church and leads his people into new truth. At the Minneapolis meeting
Bishop Robinson said God did not stop revealing his will when the scriptural
canon was closed. This is an insight drawn from the "Catholic" side of the
Episcopal heritage. It was brilliantly articulated in the 19th century by
John Henry Newman, an Anglican who became a Roman Catholic, in his
celebrated work "An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine." Newman
believed that the truths imbedded in biblical doctrines only gradually come
to light over the centuries as the church faced new challenges. The
farewell message of an earlier Pastor Robinson, as he sent the Pilgrim
fathers (who were of course Anglicans), off for the new world were,
"Remember, God has yet new light and truth to break forth from his holy
word." It is a sound insight. Episcopalians, like most Christians, are
Trinitarians. They believe the Divine Spirit, which guides the church
today, is just as divine as the Father and the Son. Consequently, the
living tradition of the church, when taken in tandem with the Bible and with
past tradition, must also be recognized as a valid expression of authority.
Reason also has a role to play, although never on its own. It must
always be guided and corrected by Scripture and tradition. It is clear to
any reasonable person today, for example, that when the biblical
prohibitions against non-reproductive sex were first enunciated, the
population problem was the reverse of what it is today. Most children died
in infancy, plagues and natural disasters struck frequently, and there was
always the possibility that the tribe itself could perish. Every drop of
semen had to be directed toward replenishing the race. This is hardly our
issue today.
As for experience, another pillar of authority, all we have to do is
look around us. In the last decades many gay and lesbian people, including
the Christians among them, no longer feel they have to pretend or
dissimulate. They are now part of our lives. They fix our TV's, sit in the
halls of Congress, teach in our schools and colleges and write the books we
read. The vast majority of them shun the gay demimonde. They are too busy
doing cancer research and practicing their cellos. In most of these fields
they can rise to whatever level their ability and dedication permit. Most
of us would prefer to be in the hands of a skilled gay brain surgeon or
airline pilot rather than be left to the mercy of a straight one who is just
learning the ropes. Luckily we are spared that choice today. Should the
church remain the only exception to what we experience and appreciate every
day in the other areas of or lives?
For years now many local churches of different denominations have
identified themselves as "open and welcoming" congregations. What they all
report is that after an initial flurry, soon gay and lesbian members simply
attend communion, sing in the choir, present their adopted children for
baptism, sign up for spiritual retreats, staff the food pantry and attend
Bible study and prayer groups. They do not like to be singled out as
different, nor do they want to belong to a "gay church." They want to be
treated with dignity and respect, as we all do, while they try to meet their
own spiritual needs and follow the teachings of Jesus (who never uttered a
syllable about homosexuality) to care for the wounded, feed the hungry and
show compassion to the broken-hearted.
Several other denominations have been stalling for years on the
status of gay Christians in the church. Should they be welcomed at all, or
barred at the door? Should they be content with second-class citizenship
and excluded from leadership? Should we go back to pretending they are not
there at all when everyone knows they are? We as Christians need to get
past this enervating debate so that we can move on to other pressing issues
that require the churches' attention, such as the growing gap between the
rich and the poor - about which Jesus did have something very clear to say.
I am not an Episcopalian, but I commend that church for the
deliberate way it proceeded to come to a decision about the nagging
questions that have paralyzed so many other churches. The rest of us have
been set a good example.
. Mr. Cox, Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard, is the author of
"Common Prayers: Faith, Family and a Christian's Journey Through the Jewish
Year" (Mariner, 2002).
Not All of Us Can Accessorize, Kenya Anglicans may cut U.S. ties over gay bishop
1. WASHINGTON POST Not All of Us Can Accessorize
2. TRAVERSE CITY RECORD-EAGLE (Michigan) Episcopal bishop is taken in
stride; Church won't be divided, say local ministers
3. AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE France courts gay tourists, with Paris as main
selling point
4. NASHUA TELEGRAPH (New Hampshire) Group founded by gay bishop helps
teens feel safe
5. REUTERS Kenya Anglicans may cut U.S. ties over gay bishop
6. TORONTO STAR African bishops denounce decision on Robinson
Washington Post, August 10, 2003
1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20071
(E-Mail: letterstoed@washpost.com )( http://washingtonpost.com/ )
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36916-2003Aug8.html
Not All of Us Can Accessorize
By Louis Bayard
Bravo's "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" may be the hottest show on
television right now - no less an authority than Entertainment Weekly has
declared it "summer's breakout hit." But frankly, it's becoming a major
problem for some of us out here in the gay community. So, in hopes of
turning the lavender tide before anyone else gets swept away, I offer this
open letter to the show's producers. Additional signatories welcome.
Hey Guys:
Don't get me wrong. I love the show. Really. The whole "Fab 5"
thing, with the glamour homos swooping in on the hapless straight guy and,
in the space of five minutes or something, rendering him fit for society,
love, career. . . . It's all a great big 10-gallon hoot and a half. Love
the bitchy quips. Love the grooming tips. Love it when the style queens
gather in the closing minutes like beer swillers at a sports bar to cheer
their boy into the end zone.
But I have to tell you, your show is placing enormous pressure on me
. . . and on the great silent majority of gay men who (I'm extrapolating
here) really aren't that fab. Think - please think! - about the message you
are conveying to straight America. They watch your show and they come away
believing that every homosexual is a hairstylist, runway model, interior
designer, oenophile, chef and cultural commissar wrapped up in a
form-fitting ribbed tee. I'm here to tell you, it just ain't so.
If I could describe to you the office in which this dispatch is being
typed, you would be shocked - shocked! - at the level of squalor that a gay
man, if he puts his mind to it, can attain. To the wall above me cling the
shreds of a wallpaper border that was designed for, and chosen by, a
7-year-old boy - the son of my house's previous owners. Did I take down
this mincing little frieze of choo-choos and sailboats and big baby-blue
airplanes and replace it with something more Tuscan or Grecian? I did not.
Have I made any sorties against the spider web that has been gathering
insect carcasses behind my bookcase since the middle Cambrian Period? I
have not. Have I, at any time in the last decade, changed the cat litter
that is even now stinging my nostrils with its effluvium? No indeed.
Ah, but that doesn't matter. Gay men are great cooks, right? I
mean, it's hard-wired right into our little Calphalon hypothalami, isn't it?
Well, yesterday morning, I burned half a rasher of bacon. This was not a
mere accident. This was not one of those
I-was-distracted-by-a-gunshot-and-a-loud-ungodly-cry kind of situations.
No, I was there the whole time, watching the bacon resolve into soot and
fume . . . strangely helpless to stop it . . . waiting, waiting for
something - a smoke alarm, as it turned out - to jar me into action.
And after I pulled my carbonized fat off the fire? I ate it.
Oh, and you know that tip "Grooming Guru" Kyan gave on a recent
episode, about applying hair product from back to front? Tried it. I
looked like Speed Racer after he takes off his helmet.
As for this clothes sense that we gay men are alleged to have. . . .
Well, I guess you just haven't smelled my sandals lately. You weren't there
the other night when I was rifling through my dresser drawer for a single
pair of hole-free socks - I'm still looking. You didn't see the Gap shirt I
had to throw on yesterday morning, the one so tessellated by wrinkles it
seemed to be made of foil. You didn't see me trying to match a red tee to a
pair of blue-and-white glen-plaid shorts. Or the look on my partner's face
when he stopped me just in time. "The horror," said that look. "The
horror." (He's a little closer to your beau ideal than I am.)
I haven't shaved in four days. I haven't had my shoes polished in
three years. I wouldn't know an exfoliant from an exterminant. Don't you
see? I lose this game on all points. . . . And yet, thanks to you and your
show, no one will believe me. Loved ones and strangers alike persist in
thinking that my brain must be a golden hoard of exotic knowledge. They
expect me to know the names of every kind of lily. They expect me to
distinguish Tiffany from Baccarat from Sears. They scour my medicine
cabinets for moisturizers that have never lived there. My brother called
the other day and asked me where I thought interest rates were heading.
Interest rates?
I'm telling you, if you guys keep driving home this vision of
homosexual supercompetence, you will leave me but one alternative: I will
have to demand that the Fab 5 come over and remake my life, too. Then you
will see that slovenliness knows no sexuality. It droppeth as does the
sludgy rain from heaven, afflicting him that loves women and him that loves
men.
So come on, Fab 5. Help me be the gay man I should be. And hurry.
This cat litter is really starting to reek.
Yours very sincerely,
Queer Guy with a Straight Eye
. Louis Bayard is a Washington novelist and slob.
Traverse City Record-Eagle, August 10, 2003
Box 632, Traverse City, MI, 49685-0632
(Fax: 616-946-8273 ) (E-Mail: letters@record-eagle.com )
( http://www.record-eagle.com/ )
http://www.record-eagle.com/2003/aug/10church.htm
Episcopal bishop is taken in stride
Church won't be divided, say local ministers
By Vanessa McCray, Record-Eagle staff writer
TRAVERSE CITY - Area Episcopal Church leaders say they don't expect
the approval last week of the church's first openly gay bishop to divide
their congregations but are split on whether the confirmation was a good
decision.
Rev. Thomas Guback of St. Christopher's Episcopal Church in Northport
says the church will withstand any division resulting from the appointment
of Rev. V. Gene Robinson as New Hampshire's bishop.
"There have been dire predictions about many things, such as more
than 25 years ago the ordination of women which some in the church
predicted would be the downfall of the church," Guback said.
Guback says the appointment of the gay bishop is a "positive" step
leaders have taken towards discerning the will of God.
"I think it was the correct decision," he said. "I think it
represents a very inclusive attitude ... which I think mirrors the
inclusiveness of Jesus."
At Grace Episcopal Church in Traverse City, the lay ministry
coordinator says he doesn't think the decision will tear apart the
congregation. Steven Wade said as an individual church the confirmation had
"very little impact."
"There may be people for whom this might be a pivotal decision in
their decision to align themselves with the Episcopal Church," Wade said.
"I don't have any sense that this is happening here locally."
Thursday, church leaders also approved a measure that says local
diocese can conduct same-sex blessings.
Church leaders are split over whether the resolution means the church
endorses the unions or simply allows local diocese to make a decision as to
whether to perform the blessings.
Wade says Grace Episcopal hasn't discussed same-sex unions but will
in the coming months.
The confusion over same-sex unions is one reason why Rev. Harold
Comer of St. Philip's in Beulah thinks the appointment of an openly gay
bishop was wrong.
"The Episcopal Church has not decided the status of gays and lesbians
who are in a relationship," Comer said. "They didn't decide whether to
develop a rite to recognize their relationships. My position is they should
have decided that first."
Comer says homosexuality in the church is a big issue, not only for
his church but "for all of Christianity."
"I hope what happened in the case of Robinson is that the ordination
was not done on the issue of homosexuality but of spirituality and devotion
to God and Jesus Christ," he said.
. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Agence France-Presse, August 10, 2003
http://www.islandpacket.com/24hour/business/story/965039p-6765338c.html
France courts gay tourists, with Paris as main selling point
by Michel Blanchard, Agence France-Presse
PARIS (AFP) - Gay tourism - long an important component of the U.S.
travel industry - is expanding rapidly in France, where industry
professionals are heavily promoting Paris as an ideal vacation spot for
homosexuals.
While the Spanish beach resorts of Ibiza or Sitges may be more
glamorous, Paris has become "a gay destination that matters in Europe, in
competition with Amsterdam," according to France's national union for gay
businesses, SNEG.
On a par with New York, Sydney or San Francisco, Paris is a holiday
locale that has all of the standard advantages - great food, vibrant
cultural life, historic sites - with the added benefit of a mix of "100
percent gay-friendly" attractions, said SNEG representatives Remy Calmon.
The French capital, which currently has a gay mayor, boasts 100
restaurants, more than 90 bars, 17 clubs, 15 saunas and more than a dozen
sex clubs that cater to gay clients, Calmon said, many of them clustered in
the central Marais neighborhood.
"The party atmosphere in Paris is often associated with gay spots,
some of which - like The Queen discotheque - are also frequented by a
heterosexual clientele," he added.
Although there are approximately four million gays and lesbians in
France, the country's researchers have never produced any figures estimating
their spending power, but it is reputed to be very high.
Meanwhile, analysts say gays account for some 10 percent of the U.S.
tourist industry's revenues - a percentage not to be overlooked, and which
has not gone unnoticed by France's travel experts.
The Paris tourist board now has a link for gay travellers on its Web
site, while the country's travel promotion board has launched a vast
marketing campaign aimed at luring gay Americans to France.
The SNEG says most of the gay foreigners visiting France are Belgian,
Dutch or German, but notes that Americans, Australians and Italians are
increasingly part of the mix.
Although Paris is the main attraction, homosexuals are also visiting
the main cities in southern France, like Marseille, Montpellier and
Toulouse. Bed and breakfasts in the region are particularly popular,
according to SNEG.
While tourist boards try to draw foreigners to Paris and other
destinations in France, specialized travel agencies are cropping up across
the country to help French homosexuals plan trips to other gay-friendly
spots worldwide.
Eurogays, an agency located in the Marais that put out a 40-page
brochure for potential clients, posted turnover last year of more than 2.5
million euros ($2.8 million), according to commercial director Basilio
Simoes.
"Gays don't want to just stay amongst themselves - they want to
receive a warm welcome wherever they go. It's important to be able to ask
for a room with a double bed without getting a strange look in return,"
Simoes said.
Hors-Serie, based in the northern French city of Lille, offers its
trips in 13 agencies across the country under the banner of the mainstream
Toulouse-based AFAT network - the French Association of Tourism Agencies.
The founder of Hors-Serie, Jean-Luc Dufrenne, hopes to earn 100,000
to 150,000 euros a year per agency, each of which sports a rainbow sticker
in the window, the universal symbol of the gay community.
While France's tourist industry has suffered as a whole in 2003 due
to a series of bad breaks ranging from forest fires to fallout from the Iraq
war, business at gay-friendly travel agencies is booming.
"July was a really excellent month for us," said one agent at OK
Tours near Les Halles in central Paris, which caters to a predominantly gay
clientele. She had just sold two 7,000-euro trips to Guatemala and Mexico.
The Internet poses a formidable threat to agency sales, industry
experts say, as there are a multitude of gay travel sites and Websurfing
offers total discretion.
The Telegraph, August 10, 2003
Box 1008, Nashua, NH, 03061
(Fax: 603-882-5138 ) (E-Mail: letters@telegraph-nh.com )
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Main.asp?SectionID=25&SubSectionID=377&Articl
eID=86450
Group founded by gay bishop helps teens feel safe
By Alex Ortolani, Associated Press Writer
CONCORD - Before Rev. V. Gene Robinson was making national headlines
as the Episcopal Church's first elected gay bishop, he helped Ryan Bolin
deal with being young, Christian and homosexual.
"I had a real hard time reconciling being gay and being Christian at
the time," said Bolin, who met Robinson at Concord Outright in 1995.
Robinson was working as assistant to the current Bishop Douglas Theuner when
he helped launch Concord Outright.
Bolin, 17 at the time, said Robinson was very caring and respectful.
"He helped me out with the bigger picture. He made me feel very
welcome and very safe," he said.
Bolin, who now lives in Minneapolis, said it's fantastic that
Robinson was confirmed bishop of the New Hampshire diocese.
"He's one of the most unassuming, quiet, nice people. To think that
this kind of person would create such an international raucous is
mind-blowing," he said.
Concord Outright was started in 1995 and provides a meeting space for
gay teens and their friends to meet and talk with two to three adult
counselors about topics such as homophobic peers, drugs, relationships and
families.
The group got negative publicity when Robinson's confirmation was
delayed, partly because of an allegation that its Web site was indirectly
linked to pornography.
Martha Yager, co-chairwoman of the group's board of directors, said
the Web site had links to resources for people interested in issues
surrounding homosexuality, but not porn. She said one of those links led to
a bisexual page, which in turn linked to a porn site.
Yager said Robinson hasn't been involved with the group since 1998
and had no role in developing its Web page.
Knox Turner, one of Outright's founders, said Robinson got involved
because he saw the need to give teenagers a safe space to talk and ask
questions.
"This is an extraordinary man. He was so concerned about the kids.
He understood the problems they were facing," he said.
Turner and Robinson were both counselors from 1995 to 1998, when
Robinson left because of his hectic schedule. Turner stayed on to work as
the program's administrator until 2000.
"(Robinson) was a great listener. The best facilitators are those
people who listen really well . . . Gene was excellent at this. You know a
person's a good listener by virtue of the questions they ask," he said.
Turner said Outright continues to help teens who are not receiving
support either at home or at school. He can recall a number of incidents
when the group helped teens who were depressed and even suicidal.
"We don't have an agenda. We don't try to change people's minds.
It's so they can see there are well-adjusted gay adults who are there to
listen," Turner said.
The idea for Concord Outright came from Seacoast Outright, a support
group for teens in Portsmouth. There are now nine loosely affiliated
Outright organizations located in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.
Concord Outright meets every Thursday at 7:30 p.m. at the Concord
Unitarian Universalist Church.
Reuters, August 10, 2003
http://www.sabcnews.com/africa/east_africa/0,1009,63700,00.html
Kenya Anglicans may cut US ties over gay bishop
Kenya's Anglican Church said today it might cut ties with US
Episcopalians after their Anglican US Episcopal Church as bishop of New
Hampshire, in a move that is threatening to split the Anglican Church and
its 70 million followers worldwide. "We are thinking of that (cutting
ties)," Benjamin Nzimbi, the Archbishop of the Anglican Church of Kenya,
told Reuters. "Those who are not abiding by the regulations, the tradition
and the natural way of doing things are kicking themselves out of the
communion."
While many churches in developing nations have condemned the move as
a betrayal of Christian teaching few have spoken of cutting links with the
US Episcopal Church, an affiliate of the Anglican communion. Anglican
Churches are independent in each country but they liaise closely on
spiritual matters.
"Homosexuality is not accepted. This practice is against the word of
God," added Nzimbi, who leads Kenya's four million Anglicans. "Any province
which is going ahead to allow leadership in the church to somebody who is
gay or lesbian, we feel that we should not accept them."
He said a final decision would by made by a synod, or gathering, of
Kenya's Anglican leaders. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and
leader of the world's Anglicans, said on Friday he would invite senior
clergy to London to attend a meeting on the issue in mid-October.
Toronto Star, August 10, 2003
One Yonge Street, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1E6 Canada
(E-Mail: lettertoed@thestar.ca ) ( http://www.thestar.com/ )
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Artic
le_Type1&c=Article&cid=1060467904813&call_pageid=968332188492&col=9687058990
37
African bishops denounce decision
Marc Lacey, New York Times
Anglican leaders across Africa, where homosexuality is publicly
scorned, have denounced the decision of the Episcopal Church in the United
States to elect an openly gay bishop and they predict a schism within the
global Anglican Communion unless that election is overturned.
"It's wrong and it's against the Bible," said the Rev. Joseph Mutie
Kanuku, bishop of the Machakos diocese, east of Nairobi, Kenya.
"How can we go against God's words? Two men being joined is contrary
to nature and contrary to the Bible.
"You in the West may not consider it a sin but we in Africa do. We
stand with the Bible. When we are wrong, those in the West should tell us.
We are telling them this is wrong."
Opposition was just as fierce in Asia, where bishops said they might
meet this week to discuss cutting ties with the 2.3 million members of the
Episcopal Church in the United States.
"Practising homosexuality is culturally and legally not acceptable
here," said Bishop Lim Cheng Ean, leader of the Anglican Church of West
Malaysia.
Homosexuals in Africa remain closeted in all but South Africa, where
there is somewhat more openness.
From pulpit and presidential mansion, African leaders regularly
condemn homosexuality as a corrupt lifestyle that is being exported by the
West.
Faith healers regard it as the product of an evil spirit.
"I'm not denying that it is here," said Kanuku.
"But it's not in the open. It's taboo. It's against the teachings
of the Bible and we know it. Those who do it, do it in shame."
Such beliefs are difficult to ignore by a church that finds most of
its growth in the developing world.
Some of the fiercest opposition has come from the archbishop of the
17.5-million-member Anglican Church of Nigeria, the Most Rev. Peter Akinola.
In June, Akinola ordered his church to sever relations with the
Vancouver diocese after officials there ratified a liturgy for same-sex
marriages and presided at the marriage of a gay couple.
The bishop of the diocese that covers North Africa, Ethiopia, Eritrea
and Somalia, the Rev. Mouneer Anis, also portrayed the controversy as grave.
"The communion now faces a crisis over what holds us together and
indeed whether we can remain together if we hold not merely adverse but
contradictory views of the Scripture and what it teaches," he said.
2. TRAVERSE CITY RECORD-EAGLE (Michigan) Episcopal bishop is taken in
stride; Church won't be divided, say local ministers
3. AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE France courts gay tourists, with Paris as main
selling point
4. NASHUA TELEGRAPH (New Hampshire) Group founded by gay bishop helps
teens feel safe
5. REUTERS Kenya Anglicans may cut U.S. ties over gay bishop
6. TORONTO STAR African bishops denounce decision on Robinson
Washington Post, August 10, 2003
1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20071
(E-Mail: letterstoed@washpost.com )( http://washingtonpost.com/ )
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36916-2003Aug8.html
Not All of Us Can Accessorize
By Louis Bayard
Bravo's "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" may be the hottest show on
television right now - no less an authority than Entertainment Weekly has
declared it "summer's breakout hit." But frankly, it's becoming a major
problem for some of us out here in the gay community. So, in hopes of
turning the lavender tide before anyone else gets swept away, I offer this
open letter to the show's producers. Additional signatories welcome.
Hey Guys:
Don't get me wrong. I love the show. Really. The whole "Fab 5"
thing, with the glamour homos swooping in on the hapless straight guy and,
in the space of five minutes or something, rendering him fit for society,
love, career. . . . It's all a great big 10-gallon hoot and a half. Love
the bitchy quips. Love the grooming tips. Love it when the style queens
gather in the closing minutes like beer swillers at a sports bar to cheer
their boy into the end zone.
But I have to tell you, your show is placing enormous pressure on me
. . . and on the great silent majority of gay men who (I'm extrapolating
here) really aren't that fab. Think - please think! - about the message you
are conveying to straight America. They watch your show and they come away
believing that every homosexual is a hairstylist, runway model, interior
designer, oenophile, chef and cultural commissar wrapped up in a
form-fitting ribbed tee. I'm here to tell you, it just ain't so.
If I could describe to you the office in which this dispatch is being
typed, you would be shocked - shocked! - at the level of squalor that a gay
man, if he puts his mind to it, can attain. To the wall above me cling the
shreds of a wallpaper border that was designed for, and chosen by, a
7-year-old boy - the son of my house's previous owners. Did I take down
this mincing little frieze of choo-choos and sailboats and big baby-blue
airplanes and replace it with something more Tuscan or Grecian? I did not.
Have I made any sorties against the spider web that has been gathering
insect carcasses behind my bookcase since the middle Cambrian Period? I
have not. Have I, at any time in the last decade, changed the cat litter
that is even now stinging my nostrils with its effluvium? No indeed.
Ah, but that doesn't matter. Gay men are great cooks, right? I
mean, it's hard-wired right into our little Calphalon hypothalami, isn't it?
Well, yesterday morning, I burned half a rasher of bacon. This was not a
mere accident. This was not one of those
I-was-distracted-by-a-gunshot-and-a-loud-ungodly-cry kind of situations.
No, I was there the whole time, watching the bacon resolve into soot and
fume . . . strangely helpless to stop it . . . waiting, waiting for
something - a smoke alarm, as it turned out - to jar me into action.
And after I pulled my carbonized fat off the fire? I ate it.
Oh, and you know that tip "Grooming Guru" Kyan gave on a recent
episode, about applying hair product from back to front? Tried it. I
looked like Speed Racer after he takes off his helmet.
As for this clothes sense that we gay men are alleged to have. . . .
Well, I guess you just haven't smelled my sandals lately. You weren't there
the other night when I was rifling through my dresser drawer for a single
pair of hole-free socks - I'm still looking. You didn't see the Gap shirt I
had to throw on yesterday morning, the one so tessellated by wrinkles it
seemed to be made of foil. You didn't see me trying to match a red tee to a
pair of blue-and-white glen-plaid shorts. Or the look on my partner's face
when he stopped me just in time. "The horror," said that look. "The
horror." (He's a little closer to your beau ideal than I am.)
I haven't shaved in four days. I haven't had my shoes polished in
three years. I wouldn't know an exfoliant from an exterminant. Don't you
see? I lose this game on all points. . . . And yet, thanks to you and your
show, no one will believe me. Loved ones and strangers alike persist in
thinking that my brain must be a golden hoard of exotic knowledge. They
expect me to know the names of every kind of lily. They expect me to
distinguish Tiffany from Baccarat from Sears. They scour my medicine
cabinets for moisturizers that have never lived there. My brother called
the other day and asked me where I thought interest rates were heading.
Interest rates?
I'm telling you, if you guys keep driving home this vision of
homosexual supercompetence, you will leave me but one alternative: I will
have to demand that the Fab 5 come over and remake my life, too. Then you
will see that slovenliness knows no sexuality. It droppeth as does the
sludgy rain from heaven, afflicting him that loves women and him that loves
men.
So come on, Fab 5. Help me be the gay man I should be. And hurry.
This cat litter is really starting to reek.
Yours very sincerely,
Queer Guy with a Straight Eye
. Louis Bayard is a Washington novelist and slob.
Traverse City Record-Eagle, August 10, 2003
Box 632, Traverse City, MI, 49685-0632
(Fax: 616-946-8273 ) (E-Mail: letters@record-eagle.com )
( http://www.record-eagle.com/ )
http://www.record-eagle.com/2003/aug/10church.htm
Episcopal bishop is taken in stride
Church won't be divided, say local ministers
By Vanessa McCray, Record-Eagle staff writer
TRAVERSE CITY - Area Episcopal Church leaders say they don't expect
the approval last week of the church's first openly gay bishop to divide
their congregations but are split on whether the confirmation was a good
decision.
Rev. Thomas Guback of St. Christopher's Episcopal Church in Northport
says the church will withstand any division resulting from the appointment
of Rev. V. Gene Robinson as New Hampshire's bishop.
"There have been dire predictions about many things, such as more
than 25 years ago the ordination of women which some in the church
predicted would be the downfall of the church," Guback said.
Guback says the appointment of the gay bishop is a "positive" step
leaders have taken towards discerning the will of God.
"I think it was the correct decision," he said. "I think it
represents a very inclusive attitude ... which I think mirrors the
inclusiveness of Jesus."
At Grace Episcopal Church in Traverse City, the lay ministry
coordinator says he doesn't think the decision will tear apart the
congregation. Steven Wade said as an individual church the confirmation had
"very little impact."
"There may be people for whom this might be a pivotal decision in
their decision to align themselves with the Episcopal Church," Wade said.
"I don't have any sense that this is happening here locally."
Thursday, church leaders also approved a measure that says local
diocese can conduct same-sex blessings.
Church leaders are split over whether the resolution means the church
endorses the unions or simply allows local diocese to make a decision as to
whether to perform the blessings.
Wade says Grace Episcopal hasn't discussed same-sex unions but will
in the coming months.
The confusion over same-sex unions is one reason why Rev. Harold
Comer of St. Philip's in Beulah thinks the appointment of an openly gay
bishop was wrong.
"The Episcopal Church has not decided the status of gays and lesbians
who are in a relationship," Comer said. "They didn't decide whether to
develop a rite to recognize their relationships. My position is they should
have decided that first."
Comer says homosexuality in the church is a big issue, not only for
his church but "for all of Christianity."
"I hope what happened in the case of Robinson is that the ordination
was not done on the issue of homosexuality but of spirituality and devotion
to God and Jesus Christ," he said.
. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Agence France-Presse, August 10, 2003
http://www.islandpacket.com/24hour/business/story/965039p-6765338c.html
France courts gay tourists, with Paris as main selling point
by Michel Blanchard, Agence France-Presse
PARIS (AFP) - Gay tourism - long an important component of the U.S.
travel industry - is expanding rapidly in France, where industry
professionals are heavily promoting Paris as an ideal vacation spot for
homosexuals.
While the Spanish beach resorts of Ibiza or Sitges may be more
glamorous, Paris has become "a gay destination that matters in Europe, in
competition with Amsterdam," according to France's national union for gay
businesses, SNEG.
On a par with New York, Sydney or San Francisco, Paris is a holiday
locale that has all of the standard advantages - great food, vibrant
cultural life, historic sites - with the added benefit of a mix of "100
percent gay-friendly" attractions, said SNEG representatives Remy Calmon.
The French capital, which currently has a gay mayor, boasts 100
restaurants, more than 90 bars, 17 clubs, 15 saunas and more than a dozen
sex clubs that cater to gay clients, Calmon said, many of them clustered in
the central Marais neighborhood.
"The party atmosphere in Paris is often associated with gay spots,
some of which - like The Queen discotheque - are also frequented by a
heterosexual clientele," he added.
Although there are approximately four million gays and lesbians in
France, the country's researchers have never produced any figures estimating
their spending power, but it is reputed to be very high.
Meanwhile, analysts say gays account for some 10 percent of the U.S.
tourist industry's revenues - a percentage not to be overlooked, and which
has not gone unnoticed by France's travel experts.
The Paris tourist board now has a link for gay travellers on its Web
site, while the country's travel promotion board has launched a vast
marketing campaign aimed at luring gay Americans to France.
The SNEG says most of the gay foreigners visiting France are Belgian,
Dutch or German, but notes that Americans, Australians and Italians are
increasingly part of the mix.
Although Paris is the main attraction, homosexuals are also visiting
the main cities in southern France, like Marseille, Montpellier and
Toulouse. Bed and breakfasts in the region are particularly popular,
according to SNEG.
While tourist boards try to draw foreigners to Paris and other
destinations in France, specialized travel agencies are cropping up across
the country to help French homosexuals plan trips to other gay-friendly
spots worldwide.
Eurogays, an agency located in the Marais that put out a 40-page
brochure for potential clients, posted turnover last year of more than 2.5
million euros ($2.8 million), according to commercial director Basilio
Simoes.
"Gays don't want to just stay amongst themselves - they want to
receive a warm welcome wherever they go. It's important to be able to ask
for a room with a double bed without getting a strange look in return,"
Simoes said.
Hors-Serie, based in the northern French city of Lille, offers its
trips in 13 agencies across the country under the banner of the mainstream
Toulouse-based AFAT network - the French Association of Tourism Agencies.
The founder of Hors-Serie, Jean-Luc Dufrenne, hopes to earn 100,000
to 150,000 euros a year per agency, each of which sports a rainbow sticker
in the window, the universal symbol of the gay community.
While France's tourist industry has suffered as a whole in 2003 due
to a series of bad breaks ranging from forest fires to fallout from the Iraq
war, business at gay-friendly travel agencies is booming.
"July was a really excellent month for us," said one agent at OK
Tours near Les Halles in central Paris, which caters to a predominantly gay
clientele. She had just sold two 7,000-euro trips to Guatemala and Mexico.
The Internet poses a formidable threat to agency sales, industry
experts say, as there are a multitude of gay travel sites and Websurfing
offers total discretion.
The Telegraph, August 10, 2003
Box 1008, Nashua, NH, 03061
(Fax: 603-882-5138 ) (E-Mail: letters@telegraph-nh.com )
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Main.asp?SectionID=25&SubSectionID=377&Articl
eID=86450
Group founded by gay bishop helps teens feel safe
By Alex Ortolani, Associated Press Writer
CONCORD - Before Rev. V. Gene Robinson was making national headlines
as the Episcopal Church's first elected gay bishop, he helped Ryan Bolin
deal with being young, Christian and homosexual.
"I had a real hard time reconciling being gay and being Christian at
the time," said Bolin, who met Robinson at Concord Outright in 1995.
Robinson was working as assistant to the current Bishop Douglas Theuner when
he helped launch Concord Outright.
Bolin, 17 at the time, said Robinson was very caring and respectful.
"He helped me out with the bigger picture. He made me feel very
welcome and very safe," he said.
Bolin, who now lives in Minneapolis, said it's fantastic that
Robinson was confirmed bishop of the New Hampshire diocese.
"He's one of the most unassuming, quiet, nice people. To think that
this kind of person would create such an international raucous is
mind-blowing," he said.
Concord Outright was started in 1995 and provides a meeting space for
gay teens and their friends to meet and talk with two to three adult
counselors about topics such as homophobic peers, drugs, relationships and
families.
The group got negative publicity when Robinson's confirmation was
delayed, partly because of an allegation that its Web site was indirectly
linked to pornography.
Martha Yager, co-chairwoman of the group's board of directors, said
the Web site had links to resources for people interested in issues
surrounding homosexuality, but not porn. She said one of those links led to
a bisexual page, which in turn linked to a porn site.
Yager said Robinson hasn't been involved with the group since 1998
and had no role in developing its Web page.
Knox Turner, one of Outright's founders, said Robinson got involved
because he saw the need to give teenagers a safe space to talk and ask
questions.
"This is an extraordinary man. He was so concerned about the kids.
He understood the problems they were facing," he said.
Turner and Robinson were both counselors from 1995 to 1998, when
Robinson left because of his hectic schedule. Turner stayed on to work as
the program's administrator until 2000.
"(Robinson) was a great listener. The best facilitators are those
people who listen really well . . . Gene was excellent at this. You know a
person's a good listener by virtue of the questions they ask," he said.
Turner said Outright continues to help teens who are not receiving
support either at home or at school. He can recall a number of incidents
when the group helped teens who were depressed and even suicidal.
"We don't have an agenda. We don't try to change people's minds.
It's so they can see there are well-adjusted gay adults who are there to
listen," Turner said.
The idea for Concord Outright came from Seacoast Outright, a support
group for teens in Portsmouth. There are now nine loosely affiliated
Outright organizations located in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.
Concord Outright meets every Thursday at 7:30 p.m. at the Concord
Unitarian Universalist Church.
Reuters, August 10, 2003
http://www.sabcnews.com/africa/east_africa/0,1009,63700,00.html
Kenya Anglicans may cut US ties over gay bishop
Kenya's Anglican Church said today it might cut ties with US
Episcopalians after their Anglican US Episcopal Church as bishop of New
Hampshire, in a move that is threatening to split the Anglican Church and
its 70 million followers worldwide. "We are thinking of that (cutting
ties)," Benjamin Nzimbi, the Archbishop of the Anglican Church of Kenya,
told Reuters. "Those who are not abiding by the regulations, the tradition
and the natural way of doing things are kicking themselves out of the
communion."
While many churches in developing nations have condemned the move as
a betrayal of Christian teaching few have spoken of cutting links with the
US Episcopal Church, an affiliate of the Anglican communion. Anglican
Churches are independent in each country but they liaise closely on
spiritual matters.
"Homosexuality is not accepted. This practice is against the word of
God," added Nzimbi, who leads Kenya's four million Anglicans. "Any province
which is going ahead to allow leadership in the church to somebody who is
gay or lesbian, we feel that we should not accept them."
He said a final decision would by made by a synod, or gathering, of
Kenya's Anglican leaders. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury and
leader of the world's Anglicans, said on Friday he would invite senior
clergy to London to attend a meeting on the issue in mid-October.
Toronto Star, August 10, 2003
One Yonge Street, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1E6 Canada
(E-Mail: lettertoed@thestar.ca ) ( http://www.thestar.com/ )
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Artic
le_Type1&c=Article&cid=1060467904813&call_pageid=968332188492&col=9687058990
37
African bishops denounce decision
Marc Lacey, New York Times
Anglican leaders across Africa, where homosexuality is publicly
scorned, have denounced the decision of the Episcopal Church in the United
States to elect an openly gay bishop and they predict a schism within the
global Anglican Communion unless that election is overturned.
"It's wrong and it's against the Bible," said the Rev. Joseph Mutie
Kanuku, bishop of the Machakos diocese, east of Nairobi, Kenya.
"How can we go against God's words? Two men being joined is contrary
to nature and contrary to the Bible.
"You in the West may not consider it a sin but we in Africa do. We
stand with the Bible. When we are wrong, those in the West should tell us.
We are telling them this is wrong."
Opposition was just as fierce in Asia, where bishops said they might
meet this week to discuss cutting ties with the 2.3 million members of the
Episcopal Church in the United States.
"Practising homosexuality is culturally and legally not acceptable
here," said Bishop Lim Cheng Ean, leader of the Anglican Church of West
Malaysia.
Homosexuals in Africa remain closeted in all but South Africa, where
there is somewhat more openness.
From pulpit and presidential mansion, African leaders regularly
condemn homosexuality as a corrupt lifestyle that is being exported by the
West.
Faith healers regard it as the product of an evil spirit.
"I'm not denying that it is here," said Kanuku.
"But it's not in the open. It's taboo. It's against the teachings
of the Bible and we know it. Those who do it, do it in shame."
Such beliefs are difficult to ignore by a church that finds most of
its growth in the developing world.
Some of the fiercest opposition has come from the archbishop of the
17.5-million-member Anglican Church of Nigeria, the Most Rev. Peter Akinola.
In June, Akinola ordered his church to sever relations with the
Vancouver diocese after officials there ratified a liturgy for same-sex
marriages and presided at the marriage of a gay couple.
The bishop of the diocese that covers North Africa, Ethiopia, Eritrea
and Somalia, the Rev. Mouneer Anis, also portrayed the controversy as grave.
"The communion now faces a crisis over what holds us together and
indeed whether we can remain together if we hold not merely adverse but
contradictory views of the Scripture and what it teaches," he said.
Gays Force The Issue: Republicans and Democrats are discovering they can't avoid homosexual politics. The question is, where are the votes?
U. S. News & World Report, August 18, 2003
2400 N St. N.W., Washington, DC, 20037-1196
(Fax: 202-955-2685 ) (EMAIL: letters@usnews.com )
( http://www.usnews.com )
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/030818/usnews/18gays.htm
Gays Force The Issue: Republicans and Democrats are discovering they can't avoid homosexual politics. The question is, where are the votes?
By Dan Gilgoff
At a congressional fundraiser last summer, Bob Kabel got the chance
to do what most Republicans only dream of: pose for a photo with George W.
Bush. Then Kabel, a former chairman of the Log Cabin Republicans - the
country's biggest gay GOP group - won an even rarer prize: a personal
message from the president. "I know exactly who y'all are," Bush told
Kabel. "I'm working so that people don't have heartburn over your issues."
Kabel was moved, but the Republicans have suffered plenty of heartburn over
his issues since then.
On the other side of the aisle, things have been a bit awkward as
well. At a July 15 Human Rights Campaign forum for the Democratic
presidential contenders, the moderator grilled Sen. John Kerry on why he
supports gay "civil unions" but opposes gay marriage. "I think it's
important to do first of all what we can do," Kerry said, suggesting it was
the country, not himself, that wasn't ready for same-sex marriage. Howard
Dean, who as governor signed a law making Vermont the only state to legalize
gay civil unions, also stumbled over the gay-marriage question. He finally
asked the moderator to change the subject.
Gay issues represent rocky terrain for Republicans and Democrats
alike, but suddenly there's just no avoiding them. In June, a landmark
Supreme Court ruling overturned a Texas anti-sodomy law and effectively
legalized homosexuality. Last week, the Episcopal Church elected its first
openly gay bishop. President Bush stepped into the fray late last month,
saying he had lawyers studying how best to "codify" marriage as a
male-female institution. In Canada, two provinces have recently begun
minting gay-marriage licenses. And the United States may not be far behind:
Decisions pending in the high courts of Massachusetts and New Jersey could
soon legalize gay marriage there. As the 2004 elections inch closer, the
recent march of events presents the two parties with starkly different
challenges. For the Democrats, the trick is not coming off as too
gay-friendly to a nation that's still wrestling with its views on gay
rights. The Republicans, meanwhile, must mobilize a voter base of religious
social conservatives without alienating swing voters by seeming intolerant.
Bush has tried to keep his distance from the string of recent
controversies, but it hasn't been easy, and the president has at times
seemed squeamish. "I am mindful that we're all sinners," he said in
response to a press conference question last month. "And I caution those
who may try to take the speck out of the neighbor's eye when they've got a
log in their own." Bush kept mum on the Supreme Court decision in June and
has hedged on whether he supports a constitutional amendment barring gay
marriage, which has been introduced in the House of Representatives. Still,
the president has quietly extended a hand to gays, appointing a gay
ambassador to Romania and signing a bill that extends benefits to same-sex
partners of District of Columbia employees. "We don't always agree" with
the administration, says Log Cabin Republican Executive Director Patrick
Guerriero, "but the lines of communication we have are unprecedented."
It's a far cry from the GOP of the early 1990s, which saw Pat
Buchanan deliver a speech at the '92 Republican convention that assaulted
Clinton-Gore for being "the most . . . pro-gay ticket in history." "The
difference [in] attitudes toward gays between 10 years ago and now is night
and day," says former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, honorary chairman of the
Republican Unity Coalition, a group bent on making homosexuality a nonissue
within the party. "There isn't a person in the U.S. who doesn't have
somebody among their friends, family, or associates who isn't gay." Indeed,
22 percent of Americans reported having a gay friend or acquaintance in
1985; by 2000, that number was 56 percent.
But social conservatives warn that GOP efforts to expand the "big
tent" threaten to keep religious voters away from the polls in 2004. Bush
political adviser Karl Rove has complained publicly that 4 million of 19
million white evangelical voters stayed home on Election Day 2000.
Self-described "pro-family" groups say Bush hasn't done enough to stymie
what they call the "radical homosexual agenda."
Not a gay-rights crusader by any standard, Bush worries social
conservatives because he's seen as equivocating on gay-rights issues -
declining to support Sen. Rick Santorum's warning this spring that legalized
sodomy would lead to legalized incest and, so far, withholding support for a
marriage amendment. "Politicians always try to go hunting in the base of
their opponents to peel off a couple votes," says American Values President
and former presidential candidate Gary Bauer. "But it will become
increasingly untenable for a pro-family president to be agnostic on the
question of how to preserve a traditional marriage." Indeed, Bush's recent
remarks on the need to protect the legal definition of marriage signals a
shift to the right. Gay groups, meanwhile, are also calling on Bush to
clarify his positions. "It's going to be impossible to get through this
campaign," says the LCR's Guerriero, "without being asked if gays and
lesbians deserve the same rights as all Americans."
Delicate balance. If GOP architects get their way, though, both
sides are poised for disappointment. "The president has handled this issue
with great delicacy and sensitivity, and he needs to continue doing just
that," says Republican pollster Whit Ayres. "Gay rights is not a major
issue to anyone other than gays." Maybe.
The Democrats, meanwhile, are hoping to derail Bush's big-tent
strategy by painting the president as intolerant, while trying not to appear
too far to the left on gay rights themselves. Most of the nine Democratic
presidential contenders back some sort of gay civil unions, though the early
front-runners, like Kerry, Dean, Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, and Rep.
Richard Gephardt of Missouri, oppose gay marriage. The Democrats
unanimously support initiatives that Bush has kept quiet on or has opposed:
outlawing workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, extending
the federal hate-crimes law to protect gays, and - with the exception of Bob
Graham - repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Unlike
Bush, the Democratic contenders are depending on gays for campaign
contributions. But appearing to be aligned with gay groups may have
drawbacks. So some strategists suggest the Democrats' fervor over gay
rights will subside as the election nears. "Most people don't care about
this issue," says Democratic consultant Douglas Hattaway. "The average
voter is wondering why the president is talking about gay marriage when
millions . . . are out of work and soldiers are getting killed in Iraq."
What the jockeying over gay politics really reflects is the search
for any advantage among those crucial blocs of swing voters. Bush's
strategy is aimed less at appealing to gays - who composed roughly 5 percent
of the vote in 2000 and who voted 3 to 1 for Al Gore - and more at
live-and-let-live swing voters, namely suburban women and independents, who
experts say are turned off by a perception of intolerance. Though most
polls on gay rights don't break down responses demographically, women tend
to be more in favor of gay rights than men, while Hispanics - a fast-growing
segment of the swing vote - tend to be socially conservative. Polls on gay
issues have generally revealed an increasingly tolerant public, though
there's evidence of a backlash since the Supreme Court struck down Texas's
sodomy law. Last spring, a Gallup Poll found the country evenly split over
gay civil unions. But asked last month whether homosexual relations between
consenting adults should be legal, 48 percent of Americans said yes, down
from 60 percent in May. Those expected court decisions in New Jersey and
Massachusetts could move the poll results yet again. Political operatives
from both parties will be watching closely.
2400 N St. N.W., Washington, DC, 20037-1196
(Fax: 202-955-2685 ) (EMAIL: letters@usnews.com )
( http://www.usnews.com )
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/030818/usnews/18gays.htm
Gays Force The Issue: Republicans and Democrats are discovering they can't avoid homosexual politics. The question is, where are the votes?
By Dan Gilgoff
At a congressional fundraiser last summer, Bob Kabel got the chance
to do what most Republicans only dream of: pose for a photo with George W.
Bush. Then Kabel, a former chairman of the Log Cabin Republicans - the
country's biggest gay GOP group - won an even rarer prize: a personal
message from the president. "I know exactly who y'all are," Bush told
Kabel. "I'm working so that people don't have heartburn over your issues."
Kabel was moved, but the Republicans have suffered plenty of heartburn over
his issues since then.
On the other side of the aisle, things have been a bit awkward as
well. At a July 15 Human Rights Campaign forum for the Democratic
presidential contenders, the moderator grilled Sen. John Kerry on why he
supports gay "civil unions" but opposes gay marriage. "I think it's
important to do first of all what we can do," Kerry said, suggesting it was
the country, not himself, that wasn't ready for same-sex marriage. Howard
Dean, who as governor signed a law making Vermont the only state to legalize
gay civil unions, also stumbled over the gay-marriage question. He finally
asked the moderator to change the subject.
Gay issues represent rocky terrain for Republicans and Democrats
alike, but suddenly there's just no avoiding them. In June, a landmark
Supreme Court ruling overturned a Texas anti-sodomy law and effectively
legalized homosexuality. Last week, the Episcopal Church elected its first
openly gay bishop. President Bush stepped into the fray late last month,
saying he had lawyers studying how best to "codify" marriage as a
male-female institution. In Canada, two provinces have recently begun
minting gay-marriage licenses. And the United States may not be far behind:
Decisions pending in the high courts of Massachusetts and New Jersey could
soon legalize gay marriage there. As the 2004 elections inch closer, the
recent march of events presents the two parties with starkly different
challenges. For the Democrats, the trick is not coming off as too
gay-friendly to a nation that's still wrestling with its views on gay
rights. The Republicans, meanwhile, must mobilize a voter base of religious
social conservatives without alienating swing voters by seeming intolerant.
Bush has tried to keep his distance from the string of recent
controversies, but it hasn't been easy, and the president has at times
seemed squeamish. "I am mindful that we're all sinners," he said in
response to a press conference question last month. "And I caution those
who may try to take the speck out of the neighbor's eye when they've got a
log in their own." Bush kept mum on the Supreme Court decision in June and
has hedged on whether he supports a constitutional amendment barring gay
marriage, which has been introduced in the House of Representatives. Still,
the president has quietly extended a hand to gays, appointing a gay
ambassador to Romania and signing a bill that extends benefits to same-sex
partners of District of Columbia employees. "We don't always agree" with
the administration, says Log Cabin Republican Executive Director Patrick
Guerriero, "but the lines of communication we have are unprecedented."
It's a far cry from the GOP of the early 1990s, which saw Pat
Buchanan deliver a speech at the '92 Republican convention that assaulted
Clinton-Gore for being "the most . . . pro-gay ticket in history." "The
difference [in] attitudes toward gays between 10 years ago and now is night
and day," says former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, honorary chairman of the
Republican Unity Coalition, a group bent on making homosexuality a nonissue
within the party. "There isn't a person in the U.S. who doesn't have
somebody among their friends, family, or associates who isn't gay." Indeed,
22 percent of Americans reported having a gay friend or acquaintance in
1985; by 2000, that number was 56 percent.
But social conservatives warn that GOP efforts to expand the "big
tent" threaten to keep religious voters away from the polls in 2004. Bush
political adviser Karl Rove has complained publicly that 4 million of 19
million white evangelical voters stayed home on Election Day 2000.
Self-described "pro-family" groups say Bush hasn't done enough to stymie
what they call the "radical homosexual agenda."
Not a gay-rights crusader by any standard, Bush worries social
conservatives because he's seen as equivocating on gay-rights issues -
declining to support Sen. Rick Santorum's warning this spring that legalized
sodomy would lead to legalized incest and, so far, withholding support for a
marriage amendment. "Politicians always try to go hunting in the base of
their opponents to peel off a couple votes," says American Values President
and former presidential candidate Gary Bauer. "But it will become
increasingly untenable for a pro-family president to be agnostic on the
question of how to preserve a traditional marriage." Indeed, Bush's recent
remarks on the need to protect the legal definition of marriage signals a
shift to the right. Gay groups, meanwhile, are also calling on Bush to
clarify his positions. "It's going to be impossible to get through this
campaign," says the LCR's Guerriero, "without being asked if gays and
lesbians deserve the same rights as all Americans."
Delicate balance. If GOP architects get their way, though, both
sides are poised for disappointment. "The president has handled this issue
with great delicacy and sensitivity, and he needs to continue doing just
that," says Republican pollster Whit Ayres. "Gay rights is not a major
issue to anyone other than gays." Maybe.
The Democrats, meanwhile, are hoping to derail Bush's big-tent
strategy by painting the president as intolerant, while trying not to appear
too far to the left on gay rights themselves. Most of the nine Democratic
presidential contenders back some sort of gay civil unions, though the early
front-runners, like Kerry, Dean, Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, and Rep.
Richard Gephardt of Missouri, oppose gay marriage. The Democrats
unanimously support initiatives that Bush has kept quiet on or has opposed:
outlawing workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, extending
the federal hate-crimes law to protect gays, and - with the exception of Bob
Graham - repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Unlike
Bush, the Democratic contenders are depending on gays for campaign
contributions. But appearing to be aligned with gay groups may have
drawbacks. So some strategists suggest the Democrats' fervor over gay
rights will subside as the election nears. "Most people don't care about
this issue," says Democratic consultant Douglas Hattaway. "The average
voter is wondering why the president is talking about gay marriage when
millions . . . are out of work and soldiers are getting killed in Iraq."
What the jockeying over gay politics really reflects is the search
for any advantage among those crucial blocs of swing voters. Bush's
strategy is aimed less at appealing to gays - who composed roughly 5 percent
of the vote in 2000 and who voted 3 to 1 for Al Gore - and more at
live-and-let-live swing voters, namely suburban women and independents, who
experts say are turned off by a perception of intolerance. Though most
polls on gay rights don't break down responses demographically, women tend
to be more in favor of gay rights than men, while Hispanics - a fast-growing
segment of the swing vote - tend to be socially conservative. Polls on gay
issues have generally revealed an increasingly tolerant public, though
there's evidence of a backlash since the Supreme Court struck down Texas's
sodomy law. Last spring, a Gallup Poll found the country evenly split over
gay civil unions. But asked last month whether homosexual relations between
consenting adults should be legal, 48 percent of Americans said yes, down
from 60 percent in May. Those expected court decisions in New Jersey and
Massachusetts could move the poll results yet again. Political operatives
from both parties will be watching closely.
Same-sex couples call gay marriage a civil rights issue
Miami Herald, August 10, 2003
1 Herald Plaza, Miami, FL, 33132
(Fax: 305-527-8955 or 305-376-8950 ) (E-Mail: HeraldEd@herald.com )
( http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/ )
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6498930.htm
Same-sex couples call gay marriage a civil rights issue
By Teresa Mears, tmears@herald.com
On Aug. 20, Peter Freiberg and Joe Tom Easley of Miami Beach will
stand in front of a city clerk in Toronto and pledge to love and honor each
other for the rest of their lives. Their pledge will be somewhat
anticlimactic, since they have been loving and honoring each other for more
than 20 years.
But U.S. laws don't allow the two to get married, so Freiberg, 63, a
writer, and Easley, 62, a lawyer, are traveling to Canada where same-sex
marriage has just become legal.
When they return, their marriage won't be recognized in the United
States, but several major events in recent weeks have brought the debate
about gay marriage to the forefront. The U.S. Supreme Court's recent
decision to strike down state sodomy laws opened the door, in addition to
the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia granting full
marriage rights to gay couples. Court cases seeking the right to marry
same-sex partners are pending in Massachusetts and New Jersey.
Those cases argue that denying gay men and lesbians the right to
marry is discrimination, which has serious costs for gay couples.
Love Or Country
Just ask Greg Walton, 47, an architect in Miami Beach who designs
cruise ship interiors. His Brazilian-Italian partner's student visa will
run out soon. If the two men were allowed to marry, Walton could petition
for permanent residency for his partner. But under current law, there is no
way for the two to live together legally in the United States, as a married
couple could. Unless Walton's partner can find a company to sponsor him for
a work visa, the two will have to move to London this fall, where Walton can
immediately gain residency as a domestic partner of a European Union
citizen.
"It's pretty sad to think that as a citizen of the United States,
that's the decision I face," he says. "I have to choose between the person
I love and want to spend the rest of my life with or my country."
Civil Rights Issue
Advocates of marriage rights for gays and lesbians point to a whole
host of legal rights and financial benefits that come with marriage, from
health insurance to inheritance rights to making decisions for a partner who
is critically ill. While gay couples can protect themselves somewhat
through alternative legal documents, many see the current ban on same-sex
marriage as a civil rights issue, like the bans on interracial marriage that
weren't completely abolished until 1967.
"For Tim and I to approximate marriage, we have to sort through three
feet thick of legal documents and still there's no guarantee that those
documents won't be challenged," said Javier Reynaldos, 36, chief financial
officer of an adventure travel company, who is planning a commitment
ceremony with his partner of five years, Tim Sheehan, 30, a human resources
manager.
"It's a very scary process," he said. "More than anything else, we
should have our commitment respected by the state."
Bush Sets Tone
Both proponents and opponents of gay marriage have spoken out
strongly in recent months, and the issue is sure to be hotly debated during
the 2004 presidential campaign. President Bush tried to take a
middle-of-the-road approach last month by saying that he respects gays but
believes that U.S. law should be changed to specify that marriage is only
for heterosexual couples.
Bush reflected the views of many Americans when he said, "I believe
in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a
woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or the other."
Most of the Democratic candidates oppose same-sex marriage, but
support "civil unions" that would convey the same legal and financial
benefits as marriage.
In 2000, Vermont became the first and only state to pass a law
recognizing civil unions. Vermont's civil unions bestow the full complement
of legal and financial benefits accorded by the state. But Vermont unions
aren't recognized in any state or by the federal government, which means
couples have no right to federal benefits, such as Social Security or
immigration rights.
Churches also are struggling with whether to recognize same-sex
unions. Last month, the Vatican came out with a strong statement
instructing Catholic legislators to oppose gay unions. "There are
absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way
similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family,"
the Vatican proclaimed. "Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against
the natural moral law."
Gay Bishop
The Episcopal Church last week approved its first openly gay bishop
and recognized the blessing of same-sex unions in dioceses that want them,
but not without much contentious discussion and the threat of a split from
conservatives.
Proponents of gay unions argue that marriage is an issue in which the
church has never been completely divorced from the state, and that it's time
to do that.
"When it comes to your legal rights as a couple in the United States,
it should be separated from any religious or moral opinion," said Reynaldos,
of Miami Shores. "As far as the state and federal governments are
concerned, it should be civil unions for everyone."
He and others argue that churches could set their own eligibility
rules for marriage, with the state granting civil unions on an equal basis
to all couples, gay and straight. Another alternative would be marriage for
straight couples and civil unions for gay couples, though some argue that
any "separate but equal" system is inherently unequal.
"It's not whether people can get married or not, it's whether people
are treated equally before the law," said Glenda Belote, 64, associate dean
of undergraduate studies at Florida International University and a professor
of gay and lesbian studies. A civil union 'could provide the same legal
benefits without getting into the quasi-religious aspects that go with
marriage. . . . I think it's the word `marriage' that's the red flag."
She notes that, unlike married colleagues, she's unable to buy
insurance through the university for her partner of 26 years, who is
self-employed and has less access to medical care. While many private
employers in South Florida provide domestic partner benefits, state
universities do not.
Poll Results
Polls show Americans are divided about the rights of gays and
lesbians. According to a June 2003 Gallup Tuesday Briefing poll, 39 percent
of Americans believed the law should recognize same-sex marriages as valid,
while 55 percent disagreed. A month earlier, 49 percent of Americans said
they favored civil unions with 49 percent opposed. Young people were the
most supportive of gay marriage, with 61 percent of those 18 to 29 in favor,
while only 22 percent of those over 65 agreed.
Those numbers suggest that it may not be time to push for gay
marriage, even though the legal steps required would be quite simple, said
John Witte, director of the Law and Religion Program at Emory University in
Atlanta and author of From Sacrament to Contract: Marriage, Religion and Law
in the Western Tradition.
He believes that it will take another generation to reach the
acceptance necessary to avoid a strong conservative backlash. "It's not
clear to me that we have had enough time for a deep cultural and spiritual
and moral reflection on the issue," he said.
But Sally Dodds, an associate professor of clinical psychiatry at the
University of Miami School of Medicine and an AIDS researcher, believes gay
marriage is closer than most people realize. She believes that state
recognition of gay relationships as equal to straight relationships is as
important as recognition of the rights of other diverse groups.
"A legal responsibility is not going to keep it together or break it
apart but it will afford a sense of validity and a sense of belonging in
this country," she said. "What toll gets exacted on the psyche of any
people who aren't given full benefits?"
1 Herald Plaza, Miami, FL, 33132
(Fax: 305-527-8955 or 305-376-8950 ) (E-Mail: HeraldEd@herald.com )
( http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/ )
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6498930.htm
Same-sex couples call gay marriage a civil rights issue
By Teresa Mears, tmears@herald.com
On Aug. 20, Peter Freiberg and Joe Tom Easley of Miami Beach will
stand in front of a city clerk in Toronto and pledge to love and honor each
other for the rest of their lives. Their pledge will be somewhat
anticlimactic, since they have been loving and honoring each other for more
than 20 years.
But U.S. laws don't allow the two to get married, so Freiberg, 63, a
writer, and Easley, 62, a lawyer, are traveling to Canada where same-sex
marriage has just become legal.
When they return, their marriage won't be recognized in the United
States, but several major events in recent weeks have brought the debate
about gay marriage to the forefront. The U.S. Supreme Court's recent
decision to strike down state sodomy laws opened the door, in addition to
the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia granting full
marriage rights to gay couples. Court cases seeking the right to marry
same-sex partners are pending in Massachusetts and New Jersey.
Those cases argue that denying gay men and lesbians the right to
marry is discrimination, which has serious costs for gay couples.
Love Or Country
Just ask Greg Walton, 47, an architect in Miami Beach who designs
cruise ship interiors. His Brazilian-Italian partner's student visa will
run out soon. If the two men were allowed to marry, Walton could petition
for permanent residency for his partner. But under current law, there is no
way for the two to live together legally in the United States, as a married
couple could. Unless Walton's partner can find a company to sponsor him for
a work visa, the two will have to move to London this fall, where Walton can
immediately gain residency as a domestic partner of a European Union
citizen.
"It's pretty sad to think that as a citizen of the United States,
that's the decision I face," he says. "I have to choose between the person
I love and want to spend the rest of my life with or my country."
Civil Rights Issue
Advocates of marriage rights for gays and lesbians point to a whole
host of legal rights and financial benefits that come with marriage, from
health insurance to inheritance rights to making decisions for a partner who
is critically ill. While gay couples can protect themselves somewhat
through alternative legal documents, many see the current ban on same-sex
marriage as a civil rights issue, like the bans on interracial marriage that
weren't completely abolished until 1967.
"For Tim and I to approximate marriage, we have to sort through three
feet thick of legal documents and still there's no guarantee that those
documents won't be challenged," said Javier Reynaldos, 36, chief financial
officer of an adventure travel company, who is planning a commitment
ceremony with his partner of five years, Tim Sheehan, 30, a human resources
manager.
"It's a very scary process," he said. "More than anything else, we
should have our commitment respected by the state."
Bush Sets Tone
Both proponents and opponents of gay marriage have spoken out
strongly in recent months, and the issue is sure to be hotly debated during
the 2004 presidential campaign. President Bush tried to take a
middle-of-the-road approach last month by saying that he respects gays but
believes that U.S. law should be changed to specify that marriage is only
for heterosexual couples.
Bush reflected the views of many Americans when he said, "I believe
in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a
woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or the other."
Most of the Democratic candidates oppose same-sex marriage, but
support "civil unions" that would convey the same legal and financial
benefits as marriage.
In 2000, Vermont became the first and only state to pass a law
recognizing civil unions. Vermont's civil unions bestow the full complement
of legal and financial benefits accorded by the state. But Vermont unions
aren't recognized in any state or by the federal government, which means
couples have no right to federal benefits, such as Social Security or
immigration rights.
Churches also are struggling with whether to recognize same-sex
unions. Last month, the Vatican came out with a strong statement
instructing Catholic legislators to oppose gay unions. "There are
absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way
similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family,"
the Vatican proclaimed. "Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against
the natural moral law."
Gay Bishop
The Episcopal Church last week approved its first openly gay bishop
and recognized the blessing of same-sex unions in dioceses that want them,
but not without much contentious discussion and the threat of a split from
conservatives.
Proponents of gay unions argue that marriage is an issue in which the
church has never been completely divorced from the state, and that it's time
to do that.
"When it comes to your legal rights as a couple in the United States,
it should be separated from any religious or moral opinion," said Reynaldos,
of Miami Shores. "As far as the state and federal governments are
concerned, it should be civil unions for everyone."
He and others argue that churches could set their own eligibility
rules for marriage, with the state granting civil unions on an equal basis
to all couples, gay and straight. Another alternative would be marriage for
straight couples and civil unions for gay couples, though some argue that
any "separate but equal" system is inherently unequal.
"It's not whether people can get married or not, it's whether people
are treated equally before the law," said Glenda Belote, 64, associate dean
of undergraduate studies at Florida International University and a professor
of gay and lesbian studies. A civil union 'could provide the same legal
benefits without getting into the quasi-religious aspects that go with
marriage. . . . I think it's the word `marriage' that's the red flag."
She notes that, unlike married colleagues, she's unable to buy
insurance through the university for her partner of 26 years, who is
self-employed and has less access to medical care. While many private
employers in South Florida provide domestic partner benefits, state
universities do not.
Poll Results
Polls show Americans are divided about the rights of gays and
lesbians. According to a June 2003 Gallup Tuesday Briefing poll, 39 percent
of Americans believed the law should recognize same-sex marriages as valid,
while 55 percent disagreed. A month earlier, 49 percent of Americans said
they favored civil unions with 49 percent opposed. Young people were the
most supportive of gay marriage, with 61 percent of those 18 to 29 in favor,
while only 22 percent of those over 65 agreed.
Those numbers suggest that it may not be time to push for gay
marriage, even though the legal steps required would be quite simple, said
John Witte, director of the Law and Religion Program at Emory University in
Atlanta and author of From Sacrament to Contract: Marriage, Religion and Law
in the Western Tradition.
He believes that it will take another generation to reach the
acceptance necessary to avoid a strong conservative backlash. "It's not
clear to me that we have had enough time for a deep cultural and spiritual
and moral reflection on the issue," he said.
But Sally Dodds, an associate professor of clinical psychiatry at the
University of Miami School of Medicine and an AIDS researcher, believes gay
marriage is closer than most people realize. She believes that state
recognition of gay relationships as equal to straight relationships is as
important as recognition of the rights of other diverse groups.
"A legal responsibility is not going to keep it together or break it
apart but it will afford a sense of validity and a sense of belonging in
this country," she said. "What toll gets exacted on the psyche of any
people who aren't given full benefits?"
Personal Finance: Gay couples can take steps to ensure legal protections
Baltimore Sun, August 10, 2003
501 N. Calvert Street, Baltimore, MD, 21278
(Fax: 410-332-6977 ) (E-Mail: letters@baltsun.com )
( http://www.sunspot.net/ )
http://www.sunspot.net/business/bal-bz.ambrose10aug10,0,6829545.story?coll=b
al-business-headlines
Personal Finance: Gay couples can take steps to ensure legal protections
Eileen Ambrose
Charles Butler's minor surgery last year pushed him to finally get
the documents that would give him and his partner, Stephen Tamburo, legal
protections similar to those enjoyed by a married couple.
"We've been talking about doing it for a long time," said Butler, 35,
who has been with Tamburo for nine years. "We just thought if anything
happened with me, he would be in the best position to decide what I would
want to do."
The Germantown couple executed wills, outlined the life-sustaining
procedures they would want and gave each the power to make financial and
medical decisions for the other.
"It makes me feel better, but it's not the equivalent of what married
couples would get through marriage," said Butler, a lawyer in Washington.
Gay and lesbian couples have long complained that they are unfairly
denied the legal and financial protections automatically awarded to straight
couples with a marriage license. Vermont is the only state offering civil
unions that give gay and lesbian couples many of the rights of married
couples.
The issue of rights and gay marriage has heated up this summer since
the U.S. Supreme Court struck down anti-sodomy laws and two Canadian
provinces legalized gay marriages. Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court is
expected to rule any day on same-sex marriages.
Some leading Democratic contenders for the White House have come out
in support of extending legal and financial rights to gay couples, but not
gay marriage. The pope and President Bush have weighed in with their
opposition to same-sex marriages.
Butler and Tamburo say they want a civil union that gives them
rights.
Married couples enjoy plenty of rights and tax benefits.
For example, if one spouse dies without a will, the other won't be
disinherited. "The state writes a will for you in terms of married couples.
Money goes to your spouse," said Peg Downey, a financial planner in Silver
Spring.
A spouse, too, could be eligible for Social Security survivors
benefits. And the spouse who dies first can leave the other an unlimited
amount without triggering federal estate taxes.
Not so for unmarried couples. Dying without a will means the state
dictates how assets are divvied up among relatives. Unmarried people don't
get Social Security survivors benefits. And this year, an unmarried person
would be able to leave up to $1 million to a partner before estate taxes
kick in. In Maryland, money left to a nonrelative is hit with a 10 percent
inheritance tax.
The debate over legal and financial rights for gay and lesbian
couples is unlikely to be settled soon, so in the meantime they might need
to take steps to protect themselves. The same goes for the growing number
of straight couples who are choosing to live together without getting
married. As of 2000, 5.5 million unmarried couples lived together, a 72
percent increase over a decade, according to the U.S. Census.
Here are some documents experts recommend for unmarrieds:
Estate planning documents: If one of you becomes incapacitated and
can't make decisions, the other will need powers of attorney. A financial
power of attorney gives a partner authority to manage your finances, such as
paying bills. A health care power of attorney allows a partner to make
medical decisions on your behalf.
The health care document can be much broader, including, say, who has
the right to visit you in the hospital or what kind of care you desire, said
Larry Jacobs, a Rockville lawyer and co-chair of Free State Justice, a
Maryland gay rights advocacy group.
Usually when drawing up powers of attorney, people create a living
will that states their wishes about life-sustaining measures if they're not
likely to recover from an illness or accident.
You'll need a will, too, if you want a partner to inherit your
assets.
Consider a burial directive if, say, you want your ashes sprinkled in
the Chesapeake but you worry that relatives might just bury you in the
family plot in Akron. With this document, you put your wishes on paper and
name someone to make funeral arrangements for you.
Financial experts say that in addition to getting these documents,
it's important that couples tell family members about their plans so that
there are no disputes later.
"Have that conversation before something tragic happens," said
Marshall Miller, co-author of Unmarried to Each Other: The Essential Guide
to Living Together as an Unmarried Couple.
Beneficiary designations: Don't forget to update the beneficiaries
for a 401(k), individual retirement account or life insurance policy if you
want your partner to receive this money at your death. Whoever is named as
beneficiary will receive the assets, no matter what the will states.
Some retirement plans won't allow you to name a partner as a
beneficiary, so check the plan document, Downey advised.
Cohabitation agreement: Partners should have one of these once they
begin to mingle assets, which usually occurs with the purchase of a house,
said Sally Jo Button, a Denver financial planner.
Basically, this contract defines the rights and responsibilities of
each. For example, how much will each contribute to the mortgage? If the
couple breaks up, will the house be sold and proceeds split, or will one
have the option to buy out the other's interest?
But it can do more than provide for divvying real estate. The
agreement can address whether one partner will provide the other with
financial support after a breakup, experts said. It also can contain the
partners' agreement to seek a mediator before going to a lawyer to settle
disputes, Miller said.
Last, review documents every three to four years in case your
situation changes, Downey said.
. To suggest a topic, contact Eileen Ambrose at 410-332-6984 or by
e-mail at eileen.ambrose@b
501 N. Calvert Street, Baltimore, MD, 21278
(Fax: 410-332-6977 ) (E-Mail: letters@baltsun.com )
( http://www.sunspot.net/ )
http://www.sunspot.net/business/bal-bz.ambrose10aug10,0,6829545.story?coll=b
al-business-headlines
Personal Finance: Gay couples can take steps to ensure legal protections
Eileen Ambrose
Charles Butler's minor surgery last year pushed him to finally get
the documents that would give him and his partner, Stephen Tamburo, legal
protections similar to those enjoyed by a married couple.
"We've been talking about doing it for a long time," said Butler, 35,
who has been with Tamburo for nine years. "We just thought if anything
happened with me, he would be in the best position to decide what I would
want to do."
The Germantown couple executed wills, outlined the life-sustaining
procedures they would want and gave each the power to make financial and
medical decisions for the other.
"It makes me feel better, but it's not the equivalent of what married
couples would get through marriage," said Butler, a lawyer in Washington.
Gay and lesbian couples have long complained that they are unfairly
denied the legal and financial protections automatically awarded to straight
couples with a marriage license. Vermont is the only state offering civil
unions that give gay and lesbian couples many of the rights of married
couples.
The issue of rights and gay marriage has heated up this summer since
the U.S. Supreme Court struck down anti-sodomy laws and two Canadian
provinces legalized gay marriages. Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court is
expected to rule any day on same-sex marriages.
Some leading Democratic contenders for the White House have come out
in support of extending legal and financial rights to gay couples, but not
gay marriage. The pope and President Bush have weighed in with their
opposition to same-sex marriages.
Butler and Tamburo say they want a civil union that gives them
rights.
Married couples enjoy plenty of rights and tax benefits.
For example, if one spouse dies without a will, the other won't be
disinherited. "The state writes a will for you in terms of married couples.
Money goes to your spouse," said Peg Downey, a financial planner in Silver
Spring.
A spouse, too, could be eligible for Social Security survivors
benefits. And the spouse who dies first can leave the other an unlimited
amount without triggering federal estate taxes.
Not so for unmarried couples. Dying without a will means the state
dictates how assets are divvied up among relatives. Unmarried people don't
get Social Security survivors benefits. And this year, an unmarried person
would be able to leave up to $1 million to a partner before estate taxes
kick in. In Maryland, money left to a nonrelative is hit with a 10 percent
inheritance tax.
The debate over legal and financial rights for gay and lesbian
couples is unlikely to be settled soon, so in the meantime they might need
to take steps to protect themselves. The same goes for the growing number
of straight couples who are choosing to live together without getting
married. As of 2000, 5.5 million unmarried couples lived together, a 72
percent increase over a decade, according to the U.S. Census.
Here are some documents experts recommend for unmarrieds:
Estate planning documents: If one of you becomes incapacitated and
can't make decisions, the other will need powers of attorney. A financial
power of attorney gives a partner authority to manage your finances, such as
paying bills. A health care power of attorney allows a partner to make
medical decisions on your behalf.
The health care document can be much broader, including, say, who has
the right to visit you in the hospital or what kind of care you desire, said
Larry Jacobs, a Rockville lawyer and co-chair of Free State Justice, a
Maryland gay rights advocacy group.
Usually when drawing up powers of attorney, people create a living
will that states their wishes about life-sustaining measures if they're not
likely to recover from an illness or accident.
You'll need a will, too, if you want a partner to inherit your
assets.
Consider a burial directive if, say, you want your ashes sprinkled in
the Chesapeake but you worry that relatives might just bury you in the
family plot in Akron. With this document, you put your wishes on paper and
name someone to make funeral arrangements for you.
Financial experts say that in addition to getting these documents,
it's important that couples tell family members about their plans so that
there are no disputes later.
"Have that conversation before something tragic happens," said
Marshall Miller, co-author of Unmarried to Each Other: The Essential Guide
to Living Together as an Unmarried Couple.
Beneficiary designations: Don't forget to update the beneficiaries
for a 401(k), individual retirement account or life insurance policy if you
want your partner to receive this money at your death. Whoever is named as
beneficiary will receive the assets, no matter what the will states.
Some retirement plans won't allow you to name a partner as a
beneficiary, so check the plan document, Downey advised.
Cohabitation agreement: Partners should have one of these once they
begin to mingle assets, which usually occurs with the purchase of a house,
said Sally Jo Button, a Denver financial planner.
Basically, this contract defines the rights and responsibilities of
each. For example, how much will each contribute to the mortgage? If the
couple breaks up, will the house be sold and proceeds split, or will one
have the option to buy out the other's interest?
But it can do more than provide for divvying real estate. The
agreement can address whether one partner will provide the other with
financial support after a breakup, experts said. It also can contain the
partners' agreement to seek a mediator before going to a lawyer to settle
disputes, Miller said.
Last, review documents every three to four years in case your
situation changes, Downey said.
. To suggest a topic, contact Eileen Ambrose at 410-332-6984 or by
e-mail at eileen.ambrose@b
RI group conducts its first comprehensive survey of glbt issues
KENT COUNTY TIMES (Rhode Island) A state foundation is collecting information from glbt Rhode Islanders for its first comprehensive survey of glbt issues
Kent County Daily Times,
1353 Main St., West Warwick, RI 02893
(Fax: 401-828-5073) (E-Mail: kceditor@ricentral.com )
http://www.kentcountytimes.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=9981723&BRD=1718&PAG=461
&dept_id=74409&rfi=6
The gay community
By Helena Payne, Associated Press Writer
PROVIDENCE - A state foundation is collecting information from 371
gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Rhode Islanders for its first
comprehensive survey examining issues facing the gay community.
''We know that Rhode Island in general has been changing and we would
like to get a better sense of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
queer communities in Rhode Island,'' said Rhode Island Foundation program
officer Kris Hermanns.
The survey, still in progress, questions participants on topics
ranging from why they live in Rhode Island to discrimination they may face
because of their sexual orientation.
''A lot of people felt Rhode Island was much more welcome and
embracing of diversity and people felt there was both strong cultural and
legal resources,'' Hermanns said.
Providence Mayor David Cicilline, who is gay, said the survey will
show that Rhode Island doesn't just tolerate people's differences but
celebrates them. Providence became the largest U.S. city to have an openly
gay mayor when Cicilline was elected to the post last fall.
''It will ensure we continue to be a very understanding, very
accepting and embracing community,'' Cicilline said of the survey. The
mayor was not surveyed.
The data collected could help educate others about the gay
population, said David Smith, spokesman for Human Rights Campaign, a gay
civil rights organization.
''There's very little concrete data on the views of the gay community
in Rhode Island or the entire country for that matter,'' Smith said.
The Rhode Island survey began in February as a response to a national
challenge by Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues in New York City. The New
York group asks partner philanthropy organizations to conduct thorough
studies of the gay community so each organization has a thorough
understanding of the groups it may give money to in the future.
Hermanns said previous Rhode Island studies have had a narrower
focus, examining just HIV and AIDS or youth issues.
This survey includes comments from people ages 13 to 80. It has four
components: an individual survey, an organizational survey, focus groups,
and finally, more in-depth interviews to glean more information from some
participants.
Hermanns, who also works on the Equity Action fund, which promotes
advocacy and research, said the survey will reveal areas where resources are
needed for additional research and action.
''That will just be a blueprint for how we can work with policy
makers,'' she said.
The study is timed for release on Oct. 11, which is National Coming
Out Day.
Kent County Daily Times,
1353 Main St., West Warwick, RI 02893
(Fax: 401-828-5073) (E-Mail: kceditor@ricentral.com )
http://www.kentcountytimes.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=9981723&BRD=1718&PAG=461
&dept_id=74409&rfi=6
The gay community
By Helena Payne, Associated Press Writer
PROVIDENCE - A state foundation is collecting information from 371
gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Rhode Islanders for its first
comprehensive survey examining issues facing the gay community.
''We know that Rhode Island in general has been changing and we would
like to get a better sense of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
queer communities in Rhode Island,'' said Rhode Island Foundation program
officer Kris Hermanns.
The survey, still in progress, questions participants on topics
ranging from why they live in Rhode Island to discrimination they may face
because of their sexual orientation.
''A lot of people felt Rhode Island was much more welcome and
embracing of diversity and people felt there was both strong cultural and
legal resources,'' Hermanns said.
Providence Mayor David Cicilline, who is gay, said the survey will
show that Rhode Island doesn't just tolerate people's differences but
celebrates them. Providence became the largest U.S. city to have an openly
gay mayor when Cicilline was elected to the post last fall.
''It will ensure we continue to be a very understanding, very
accepting and embracing community,'' Cicilline said of the survey. The
mayor was not surveyed.
The data collected could help educate others about the gay
population, said David Smith, spokesman for Human Rights Campaign, a gay
civil rights organization.
''There's very little concrete data on the views of the gay community
in Rhode Island or the entire country for that matter,'' Smith said.
The Rhode Island survey began in February as a response to a national
challenge by Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues in New York City. The New
York group asks partner philanthropy organizations to conduct thorough
studies of the gay community so each organization has a thorough
understanding of the groups it may give money to in the future.
Hermanns said previous Rhode Island studies have had a narrower
focus, examining just HIV and AIDS or youth issues.
This survey includes comments from people ages 13 to 80. It has four
components: an individual survey, an organizational survey, focus groups,
and finally, more in-depth interviews to glean more information from some
participants.
Hermanns, who also works on the Equity Action fund, which promotes
advocacy and research, said the survey will reveal areas where resources are
needed for additional research and action.
''That will just be a blueprint for how we can work with policy
makers,'' she said.
The study is timed for release on Oct. 11, which is National Coming
Out Day.
South Africa churchgoers embrace their own gay priest, the Very Rev. Rowan Smith, the openly gay leader of one of South Africa's old Anglican parish
NEWS24.COM (South Africa) South Africa churchgoers embrace their own gay priest, the Very Rev. Rowan Smith, the openly gay leader of one of South Africa's oldest Anglican parishes
News24.com (South Africa), August 10, 2003
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1400084,00.html
Churchgoers embrace gay priest
Cape Town - While US Episcopalians fight back protests over the
approval of the church's first openly gay bishop, the Very Rev. Rowan Smith,
the openly gay leader of one of South Africa's oldest Anglican parishes,
happily cut a cake Sunday as 150 parishioners sang "Happy Birthday" to him.
Though Smith, dean of the Cathedral Church of St George the Martyr in
Cape Town, shocked the church when he announced his homosexuality from the
pulpit about five years ago, many of his adoring parishioners have learned
to accept his sexual identity, they say.
"I don't care about gay, gay, gay like everyone is saying. He is a
good man who comes to see me in hospital when I am sick. We love him here,"
Ludmilla Dolganova, 80, said clutching a string tied to a bobbing green
balloon at Smith's 60th birthday party.
Meanwhile, the Episcopal Church - the US branch of the Anglican
church - is struggling to cope with the confirmation Tuesday of Bishop-elect
V Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who is gay.
Several conservative diocese in the United States are investigating
how they can divorce themselves from the national church.
Anglican bishops in Africa, Asia and Latin America have condemned the
confirmation, and some threatened to sever ties with the US church.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams has called an emergency
meeting for October of the world's Anglican leaders to discuss Robinson's
confirmation.
Standing in the small cathedral hall in rainy Cape Town, Smith and
his congregants argue that his homosexuality has no bearing on his role as a
religious leader.
"This cathedral is an icon of unity to the greater community," he
said, standing in the gray, stone building, surrounded by stained glass
windows. "I like to think that that is its appeal, ahead of people seeing
my sexuality first."
Smith, who joined the clergy 35 years ago, said he always knew he was
gay, but did not talk about it when he was younger out of fear of his
family's reaction.
As he got older, he spoke more openly about his sexuality to the gay
community, but he did not discuss it with parishioners.
When he was named Dean of Cape Town about seven years ago, a high
profile position in the church here, he re-evaluated his decision. About
five years ago, he took to the pulpit and told his parishioners he was gay.
Many were shocked, much like his family was when he told them. But
they learned to accept him, Smith said, and it may have brought him even
closer to his flock.
"It is common for women to hug you when leaving church, but now I
find more men reaching out for that hug as well," he said. "It is a sign
that we accept each other as people, as human beings."
Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane, head of the South African church,
accepts him as well.
'Sexual orientation not relevant'
"The sexual orientation of a person is not relevant," he told a news
conference Tuesday, singling out Smith as an example.
However, Ndungane said, homosexual clergy must be celibate, a rule
Smith says he follows.
Since revealing his orientation, Smith has caused controversy.
Three years ago, he appeared in print and television ads for a gay
and lesbian film festival wearing a full cassock with a red devil's tail
sticking out the back.
"People say homosexuals are the devil's spawn," the caption read. "I
don't believe it."
Smith said it was his way of fighting stereotypes that homosexuals
are evil. He survived the public outcry for his expulsion after apologizing
to the church.
He has also joined Aids activists in their bid to secure state
funding to treat people infected with HIV, a position shared by Ndungane and
many other religious leaders here.
Smith's progressive beliefs were evident throughout the cathedral.
In one corner, a wooden statue of a black Madonna holds an infant
surrounded by candles. Bible readings are delivered in three of the
country's official languages. English, Afrikaans and Xhosa, an indigenous
black language.
Smith's character and beliefs are far more important than his
homosexuality, Elise Van Wyk, 49, said as she helped celebrate Smith's
birthday, which fell on Friday.
'Not just a gay man'
"He manages to break barriers of class, race, denomination, clan and
sex with his sense of humor and inspiring love and humanity," she said.
"Why people like him and accept him is because he is not just a gay man
trying to do God's work. He is so much more than his sexual identity."
Though many African bishops have expressed disgust at Robinson's
appointment in the United States, Smith said he does not believe a similar
furor will erupt in South Africa.
"Under apartheid we realized what discrimination really is and saw it
in all its forms. Our culture of human rights here is much stronger and
perhaps our society is more open minded than those people debating this
matter in the United States," Smith said.
"We learned not to judge. The church said this under apartheid about
race and maybe they need to say it again now in this debate on sexuality,"
he said.
- (Sapa/AP)
News24.com (South Africa), August 10, 2003
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1400084,00.html
Churchgoers embrace gay priest
Cape Town - While US Episcopalians fight back protests over the
approval of the church's first openly gay bishop, the Very Rev. Rowan Smith,
the openly gay leader of one of South Africa's oldest Anglican parishes,
happily cut a cake Sunday as 150 parishioners sang "Happy Birthday" to him.
Though Smith, dean of the Cathedral Church of St George the Martyr in
Cape Town, shocked the church when he announced his homosexuality from the
pulpit about five years ago, many of his adoring parishioners have learned
to accept his sexual identity, they say.
"I don't care about gay, gay, gay like everyone is saying. He is a
good man who comes to see me in hospital when I am sick. We love him here,"
Ludmilla Dolganova, 80, said clutching a string tied to a bobbing green
balloon at Smith's 60th birthday party.
Meanwhile, the Episcopal Church - the US branch of the Anglican
church - is struggling to cope with the confirmation Tuesday of Bishop-elect
V Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who is gay.
Several conservative diocese in the United States are investigating
how they can divorce themselves from the national church.
Anglican bishops in Africa, Asia and Latin America have condemned the
confirmation, and some threatened to sever ties with the US church.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams has called an emergency
meeting for October of the world's Anglican leaders to discuss Robinson's
confirmation.
Standing in the small cathedral hall in rainy Cape Town, Smith and
his congregants argue that his homosexuality has no bearing on his role as a
religious leader.
"This cathedral is an icon of unity to the greater community," he
said, standing in the gray, stone building, surrounded by stained glass
windows. "I like to think that that is its appeal, ahead of people seeing
my sexuality first."
Smith, who joined the clergy 35 years ago, said he always knew he was
gay, but did not talk about it when he was younger out of fear of his
family's reaction.
As he got older, he spoke more openly about his sexuality to the gay
community, but he did not discuss it with parishioners.
When he was named Dean of Cape Town about seven years ago, a high
profile position in the church here, he re-evaluated his decision. About
five years ago, he took to the pulpit and told his parishioners he was gay.
Many were shocked, much like his family was when he told them. But
they learned to accept him, Smith said, and it may have brought him even
closer to his flock.
"It is common for women to hug you when leaving church, but now I
find more men reaching out for that hug as well," he said. "It is a sign
that we accept each other as people, as human beings."
Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane, head of the South African church,
accepts him as well.
'Sexual orientation not relevant'
"The sexual orientation of a person is not relevant," he told a news
conference Tuesday, singling out Smith as an example.
However, Ndungane said, homosexual clergy must be celibate, a rule
Smith says he follows.
Since revealing his orientation, Smith has caused controversy.
Three years ago, he appeared in print and television ads for a gay
and lesbian film festival wearing a full cassock with a red devil's tail
sticking out the back.
"People say homosexuals are the devil's spawn," the caption read. "I
don't believe it."
Smith said it was his way of fighting stereotypes that homosexuals
are evil. He survived the public outcry for his expulsion after apologizing
to the church.
He has also joined Aids activists in their bid to secure state
funding to treat people infected with HIV, a position shared by Ndungane and
many other religious leaders here.
Smith's progressive beliefs were evident throughout the cathedral.
In one corner, a wooden statue of a black Madonna holds an infant
surrounded by candles. Bible readings are delivered in three of the
country's official languages. English, Afrikaans and Xhosa, an indigenous
black language.
Smith's character and beliefs are far more important than his
homosexuality, Elise Van Wyk, 49, said as she helped celebrate Smith's
birthday, which fell on Friday.
'Not just a gay man'
"He manages to break barriers of class, race, denomination, clan and
sex with his sense of humor and inspiring love and humanity," she said.
"Why people like him and accept him is because he is not just a gay man
trying to do God's work. He is so much more than his sexual identity."
Though many African bishops have expressed disgust at Robinson's
appointment in the United States, Smith said he does not believe a similar
furor will erupt in South Africa.
"Under apartheid we realized what discrimination really is and saw it
in all its forms. Our culture of human rights here is much stronger and
perhaps our society is more open minded than those people debating this
matter in the United States," Smith said.
"We learned not to judge. The church said this under apartheid about
race and maybe they need to say it again now in this debate on sexuality,"
he said.
- (Sapa/AP)
Former South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu sasays he doesn't what "all the fuss" is about, X-Kenya bishop urges: unite against Western influence
1. REUTERS Former South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu sasays he doesn't what "all the fuss" was over appointing a gay bishop, but urges homosexual
clergy to remain celibate
2. ASSOCIATED PRESS New Hampshire parish welcomes eleceted gay Bishop Gene
Robinson
3. THE DAILY NATION (Kenya) Campaign to merge churches; Retired Anglican Church of Kenya bishop urges three to unite against Western influence
4. CBC NEWS (Canada) United Church members grapple with same-sex marriages
Reuters, August 10, 2003
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/08/10/gays.tutu.reut/
Tutu dismisses gay bishop 'fuss'
SOWETO, South Africa (Reuters) - Former South African Archbishop
Desmond Tutu said on Sunday he did not see what "all the fuss" was over
appointing a gay bishop, but urged homosexual clergy to remain celibate.
The appointment of the first openly homosexual bishop by the
Episcopalians in the United States has threatened to split the Anglican
Church and its 70 million followers worldwide.
The crisis has prompted the Archbishop of Canterbury, who heads the
Anglican community, to call an emergency summit.
"For us that doesn't make a difference, the sexual orientation," Tutu
told Reuters Television in South Africa's sprawling Soweto township.
"In our Church here in South Africa, the Anglican Church in South
Africa, that doesn't make a difference. We just say that at the moment we
believe that they should remain celibate and we don't see what all the fuss
is about," he added.
Tutu was attending a farewell ceremony for Bishop Mvume Dandala who
is to head up the All Africa Conference of Churches in Kenya.
Kenya's Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi said on Sunday its Anglicans may
sever ties with the Episcopalians, the U.S. branch of the Church.
"We are thinking of cutting ties," Nzimbi told Reuters in Nairobi.
"Homosexuality is not accepted. This practice is against the word of God."
Dandala has until now served as the presiding bishop of South
Africa's Methodists who have developed increasingly close links with the
Anglicans. He said he was saddened by the furore.
"I am saddened that this issue is causing so much division in the
life of the Church. My hope and prayer is that the Church is going to
continue discussing this matter, that whatever decision people come to, that
it will be handled in a powerful pastoral way," Dandala said.
On Friday Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams summoned Church
leaders to an emergency summit in October to discuss the appointment of Gene
Robinson, an openly gay priest, as bishop of New Hampshire by the
Episcopalians.
Last month Williams averted a similar split over plans to appoint
another gay priest as a bishop in England. The priest declined the post
after an outcry from conservatives.
Anglican churches are independent in each country but liase closely
on spiritual matters.
Associated Press, August 10, 2003
N.H. Parish Welcomes Eleceted Gay Bishop
By Stephen Frothingham
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - The Rev. Gene Robinson returned to his home
church Sunday to the hugs and handshakes of hundreds of parishioners and led
the blessing there for the first time since becoming the first openly gay
Episcopalian confirmed as a bishop.
Dressed in street clothes, he sat in a pew in the middle of the
congregation for the morning service at St. Paul's Church. He led the final
blessing and afterward drank coffee and talked with parishioners in the
church basement.
"New Hampshire has never looked so good," said Robinson, who returned
Saturday evening from the Episcopalian convention in Minneapolis, where his
election as bishop was confirmed.
The service was more crowded than usual for a Sunday in August.
"There was a lot more energy than usual, too," said church member
Robyn Cotton. A few families have left the church because of Robinson's
election, but the excitement has been a positive, she said.
"We're trying to take Gene's lead and be humble," she said. "We feel
as though God's blessing is raining down on us."
The Episcopal General Convention on Tuesday confirmed Robinson as
bishop-elect of the Diocese of New Hampshire. The group also gave its
affirmation to same-sex blessing ceremonies. The Episcopal Church, with 2.3
million members, is the U.S. branch of the 77 million-member Anglican
Communion.
Robinson, a 56-year-old divorced father of two who has lived with his
partner, Mark Andrew, for more than 13 years, had predicted his confirmation
would strengthen the church by underscoring its diversity, though some
conservative Episcopalian leaders have threatened to break away.
The American Anglican Council, which represents Episcopalian
conservatives, said it will seek authorization to create a separate group in
North America.
"Clearly I've been called to play a role here," Robinson said. "But
if anyone leaves the church it's because they've chosen to, not because
they've been asked to or forced to.
"I don't hold the future of the Anglican church on my shoulders."
Robinson, who in June was selected by New Hampshire clergy and lay
Episcopalians as their choice for bishop, noted that his confirmation was
responsible for an increased interest in the Episcopal church, especially
among young people. He said hits on the church's Web site are up 44
percent.
"Young people had already decided this is a non-issue and that they
don't understand why it would be, or frankly, want to be associated with a
church where it would be an issue," he said. "I had any number of people
come up to me and say, my son or daughter is going back to church for the
first time in years."
. On the Net: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/
http://www.anglicancommunion.org/
Daily Nation, August 11, 2003
P.O.Box 49010 Nairobi, Kenya
(Fax: 254-2 213946) ( E-Mail: comments@nationaudio.com )
( http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/ )
http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/Today/News/News1108200368.html
Campaign to merge churches
Retired ACK bishop urges three to unite against Western influence
By Jeff Otieno and John Oywa
Methodists, Presbyterians and Anglicans should merge to resist
Western influence effectively, a retired Anglican Bishop said yesterday.
Bishop John Mahiaini said the idea was especially important following
the consecration of a gay bishop in US.
He urged members of the three churches, who form the St Paul United
Theological College, to campaign for a United Church of Kenya.
The bishop supported Anglican archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi on the
recent consecration of Rev Gene Robinson in New Hampshire, saying
homosexuality was against the Scripture.
"The bible condemns such practices as immoral and ungodly, " he said
in a statement.
The Anglican Church of Kenya (ACK), has threatened to sever links
with the diocese of New Hampshire over the move.
It is feared that the church could be headed for a major split
following the decision by Episcopal church of the US to recognise gay
marriages.
Rev Robinson, 56, a divorced father of two, has an open relationship
with another man.
His approval was delayed for a day by last-minute allegations of
sexual misconduct, but a church inquiry quickly dismissed them as unfounded.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who is also the head
of the 80 million strong Anglicans world-wide, has appealed to the church in
Africa not to act rashly.
Archbishop Nzimbi reiterated his stand yesterday that the ACK might
cut ties with US Episcopalians.
Anglican churches are independent in each country but they liaise
closely on spiritual matters.
"Homosexuality is not accepted. This practice is against the word of
God," added the archbishop, who leads Kenya's four million Anglicans.
"Any province which is going ahead to allow leadership in the church
to somebody who is gay or lesbian, we feel that we should not accept them."
He said a final decision would by made by a synod, or gathering, of
Kenya's Anglican leaders.
Rev Williams said on Friday he would invite senior clergy to London
to attend a meeting on the issue in mid-October.
Meanwhile, the Evangelical Lutheran Church told Anglicans not to
relent in their opposition to the consecration of gay priests.
The head of the church in Kenya, bishop Walter Obare, said Christians
in Kenya were happy with the stand of the ACK on the gay debate.
"Kenyan Christians are happy that the Anglican church has rejected a
move by the West to impose weird, shameful and unbiblical doctrines on their
followers", he said.
He spoke at Orongo Primary school near Kisumu, when he officially
opened a free medical camp organised by the church.
- Additional reporting by Reuters
CBC News (Canada), August 10, 2003
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/08/10/unitedchurch_030810
United Church members grapple with same-sex marriages
WOLFVILLE, N.S. - The United Church stepped up its support for gays
and lesbians by putting forth a motion that condones same-sex marriage.
At a week-long meeting in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, 400 delegates from
across the country have gathered to set the church's agenda for the next
three years, including the motion of support.
"We have 25 congregations who have publicly made a declaration that
their congregation is a safe and welcoming place for gays and lesbians in
our church," said Right Reverend Marion Pardy, a moderator with the United
Church general council.
"For us it is a justice issue, and if we are working for equality in
relationship with gays and lesbians, we would obviously want politicians to
support that."
The United Church has been dealing with the issue of same-sex
partnerships for almost 20 years.
In 1984, it issued a statement of support and in 1988, it welcomed
the ordination of gays and lesbians to the ministry. Now it's deciding
whether or not to put its weight behind same-sex marriages.
Despite the church's gay positive history, some parishioners question
the use of the word marriage.
"Why don't we use another word?" asked one member. "The word
marriage is marriage and it's man and woman," said another.
In the end, it will be up to individual congregations within the
United Church to decide if they will unite same-sex couples.
Whether that will remain a union, or become a marriage, will be up to
the federal government, which is not expected to begin debate of the
same-sex marriage legislation until next year.
clergy to remain celibate
2. ASSOCIATED PRESS New Hampshire parish welcomes eleceted gay Bishop Gene
Robinson
3. THE DAILY NATION (Kenya) Campaign to merge churches; Retired Anglican Church of Kenya bishop urges three to unite against Western influence
4. CBC NEWS (Canada) United Church members grapple with same-sex marriages
Reuters, August 10, 2003
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/08/10/gays.tutu.reut/
Tutu dismisses gay bishop 'fuss'
SOWETO, South Africa (Reuters) - Former South African Archbishop
Desmond Tutu said on Sunday he did not see what "all the fuss" was over
appointing a gay bishop, but urged homosexual clergy to remain celibate.
The appointment of the first openly homosexual bishop by the
Episcopalians in the United States has threatened to split the Anglican
Church and its 70 million followers worldwide.
The crisis has prompted the Archbishop of Canterbury, who heads the
Anglican community, to call an emergency summit.
"For us that doesn't make a difference, the sexual orientation," Tutu
told Reuters Television in South Africa's sprawling Soweto township.
"In our Church here in South Africa, the Anglican Church in South
Africa, that doesn't make a difference. We just say that at the moment we
believe that they should remain celibate and we don't see what all the fuss
is about," he added.
Tutu was attending a farewell ceremony for Bishop Mvume Dandala who
is to head up the All Africa Conference of Churches in Kenya.
Kenya's Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi said on Sunday its Anglicans may
sever ties with the Episcopalians, the U.S. branch of the Church.
"We are thinking of cutting ties," Nzimbi told Reuters in Nairobi.
"Homosexuality is not accepted. This practice is against the word of God."
Dandala has until now served as the presiding bishop of South
Africa's Methodists who have developed increasingly close links with the
Anglicans. He said he was saddened by the furore.
"I am saddened that this issue is causing so much division in the
life of the Church. My hope and prayer is that the Church is going to
continue discussing this matter, that whatever decision people come to, that
it will be handled in a powerful pastoral way," Dandala said.
On Friday Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams summoned Church
leaders to an emergency summit in October to discuss the appointment of Gene
Robinson, an openly gay priest, as bishop of New Hampshire by the
Episcopalians.
Last month Williams averted a similar split over plans to appoint
another gay priest as a bishop in England. The priest declined the post
after an outcry from conservatives.
Anglican churches are independent in each country but liase closely
on spiritual matters.
Associated Press, August 10, 2003
N.H. Parish Welcomes Eleceted Gay Bishop
By Stephen Frothingham
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - The Rev. Gene Robinson returned to his home
church Sunday to the hugs and handshakes of hundreds of parishioners and led
the blessing there for the first time since becoming the first openly gay
Episcopalian confirmed as a bishop.
Dressed in street clothes, he sat in a pew in the middle of the
congregation for the morning service at St. Paul's Church. He led the final
blessing and afterward drank coffee and talked with parishioners in the
church basement.
"New Hampshire has never looked so good," said Robinson, who returned
Saturday evening from the Episcopalian convention in Minneapolis, where his
election as bishop was confirmed.
The service was more crowded than usual for a Sunday in August.
"There was a lot more energy than usual, too," said church member
Robyn Cotton. A few families have left the church because of Robinson's
election, but the excitement has been a positive, she said.
"We're trying to take Gene's lead and be humble," she said. "We feel
as though God's blessing is raining down on us."
The Episcopal General Convention on Tuesday confirmed Robinson as
bishop-elect of the Diocese of New Hampshire. The group also gave its
affirmation to same-sex blessing ceremonies. The Episcopal Church, with 2.3
million members, is the U.S. branch of the 77 million-member Anglican
Communion.
Robinson, a 56-year-old divorced father of two who has lived with his
partner, Mark Andrew, for more than 13 years, had predicted his confirmation
would strengthen the church by underscoring its diversity, though some
conservative Episcopalian leaders have threatened to break away.
The American Anglican Council, which represents Episcopalian
conservatives, said it will seek authorization to create a separate group in
North America.
"Clearly I've been called to play a role here," Robinson said. "But
if anyone leaves the church it's because they've chosen to, not because
they've been asked to or forced to.
"I don't hold the future of the Anglican church on my shoulders."
Robinson, who in June was selected by New Hampshire clergy and lay
Episcopalians as their choice for bishop, noted that his confirmation was
responsible for an increased interest in the Episcopal church, especially
among young people. He said hits on the church's Web site are up 44
percent.
"Young people had already decided this is a non-issue and that they
don't understand why it would be, or frankly, want to be associated with a
church where it would be an issue," he said. "I had any number of people
come up to me and say, my son or daughter is going back to church for the
first time in years."
. On the Net: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/
http://www.anglicancommunion.org/
Daily Nation, August 11, 2003
P.O.Box 49010 Nairobi, Kenya
(Fax: 254-2 213946) ( E-Mail: comments@nationaudio.com )
( http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/ )
http://www.nationaudio.com/News/DailyNation/Today/News/News1108200368.html
Campaign to merge churches
Retired ACK bishop urges three to unite against Western influence
By Jeff Otieno and John Oywa
Methodists, Presbyterians and Anglicans should merge to resist
Western influence effectively, a retired Anglican Bishop said yesterday.
Bishop John Mahiaini said the idea was especially important following
the consecration of a gay bishop in US.
He urged members of the three churches, who form the St Paul United
Theological College, to campaign for a United Church of Kenya.
The bishop supported Anglican archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi on the
recent consecration of Rev Gene Robinson in New Hampshire, saying
homosexuality was against the Scripture.
"The bible condemns such practices as immoral and ungodly, " he said
in a statement.
The Anglican Church of Kenya (ACK), has threatened to sever links
with the diocese of New Hampshire over the move.
It is feared that the church could be headed for a major split
following the decision by Episcopal church of the US to recognise gay
marriages.
Rev Robinson, 56, a divorced father of two, has an open relationship
with another man.
His approval was delayed for a day by last-minute allegations of
sexual misconduct, but a church inquiry quickly dismissed them as unfounded.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who is also the head
of the 80 million strong Anglicans world-wide, has appealed to the church in
Africa not to act rashly.
Archbishop Nzimbi reiterated his stand yesterday that the ACK might
cut ties with US Episcopalians.
Anglican churches are independent in each country but they liaise
closely on spiritual matters.
"Homosexuality is not accepted. This practice is against the word of
God," added the archbishop, who leads Kenya's four million Anglicans.
"Any province which is going ahead to allow leadership in the church
to somebody who is gay or lesbian, we feel that we should not accept them."
He said a final decision would by made by a synod, or gathering, of
Kenya's Anglican leaders.
Rev Williams said on Friday he would invite senior clergy to London
to attend a meeting on the issue in mid-October.
Meanwhile, the Evangelical Lutheran Church told Anglicans not to
relent in their opposition to the consecration of gay priests.
The head of the church in Kenya, bishop Walter Obare, said Christians
in Kenya were happy with the stand of the ACK on the gay debate.
"Kenyan Christians are happy that the Anglican church has rejected a
move by the West to impose weird, shameful and unbiblical doctrines on their
followers", he said.
He spoke at Orongo Primary school near Kisumu, when he officially
opened a free medical camp organised by the church.
- Additional reporting by Reuters
CBC News (Canada), August 10, 2003
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/08/10/unitedchurch_030810
United Church members grapple with same-sex marriages
WOLFVILLE, N.S. - The United Church stepped up its support for gays
and lesbians by putting forth a motion that condones same-sex marriage.
At a week-long meeting in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, 400 delegates from
across the country have gathered to set the church's agenda for the next
three years, including the motion of support.
"We have 25 congregations who have publicly made a declaration that
their congregation is a safe and welcoming place for gays and lesbians in
our church," said Right Reverend Marion Pardy, a moderator with the United
Church general council.
"For us it is a justice issue, and if we are working for equality in
relationship with gays and lesbians, we would obviously want politicians to
support that."
The United Church has been dealing with the issue of same-sex
partnerships for almost 20 years.
In 1984, it issued a statement of support and in 1988, it welcomed
the ordination of gays and lesbians to the ministry. Now it's deciding
whether or not to put its weight behind same-sex marriages.
Despite the church's gay positive history, some parishioners question
the use of the word marriage.
"Why don't we use another word?" asked one member. "The word
marriage is marriage and it's man and woman," said another.
In the end, it will be up to individual congregations within the
United Church to decide if they will unite same-sex couples.
Whether that will remain a union, or become a marriage, will be up to
the federal government, which is not expected to begin debate of the
same-sex marriage legislation until next year.
August 11, 2003
onservative Christian lobby group Equates Gays With KKK: Vows No More Disney Gay Days
365Gay.com, August 9, 2003
http://www.365gay.com/NewsContent/080903gayDays.htm
Group Equates Gays With KKK: Vows No More Disney Gay Days
by Doreen Brandt, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Washington Bureau
Washington, D.C. - A conservative Christian lobby group is vowing to
put an end to the popular Gay Days at Disney World in Florida.
The Virginia based Christian Action Network has been demonstrating
against Gay Days for nearly a decade with little success, but now it says
its campaign is gaining momentum.
The group has a video that it made of this June's annual party at the
Florida theme park and at clubs in the Orlando area that it says shows
"orgies and depravity".
CAN announced Friday it will distribute the tape to news
organizations across the country, and show it to Christian groups and
encourage them to lobby against the popular event. The group says Disney is
promoting "debauchery" and though it has not called for a boycott, it
carefully lists in a news release all of the companies owned by the Disney
Corp. including ABC television.
"I want to point out that this event is not called 'Gay Days in
Orlando,' it's called 'Gay Days at Walt Disney World,'" CAN President Martin
Mawyer said. "And as such, we believe Disney is responsible for all the
activity that takes place under the umbrella of this event, whether it takes
place on Disney property or off Disney property." Many of the parties and
other events that make up Gay Days take place in venues throughout the
Orlando area.
In a media release CAN says the videotape "depicts homosexuals
kissing and fondling each other and engaging in public nudity, simulated sex
acts and alleged drug use at Disney theme parks" but a clip provided shows
only gay men kissing and enjoying water rides at the park. The clip did not
contain nudity or drug use.
"It's absolutely impossible to describe the depth of depravity we
saw," said Mawyer who claims Disney officials tried to have him arrested for
making the tape.
"Not only did we see men kissing men, but these shirtless homosexuals
were twisting the nipples of each other and fondling the butts and groins of
their 'lovers.' And all this occurred right out in the open at a Disney
theme park."
Mawyer said his organization plans to tour 24 cities in 12
southeastern states, showing the video to local media, church leaders and
public officials.
The group is demanding that Walt Disney World prevent Gay Days
organizers from using the Disney name, that the company post signs warning
parents of the event, that it arrest any Gay Days participant who "engages
in unlawful acts of lewdness", that it warn parents before they make
reservations at Disney-owned hotels, and that it reimburse expenses for
guests who are offended by Gay Days.
Disney spokesperson Rena Callahan said the company rejected the
demands saying "Disney does not sponsor Gay Days, it's simply a time of year
when people come to Central Florida."
Mawyer then equated Gay Days with a meeting of the Ku Klux Klan.
"Let's be honest. Disney would never allow an event to be called 'KKK Days
at Walt Disney World'... Disney would use every legal muscle within their
power to have their name removed from that event."
http://www.365gay.com/NewsContent/080903gayDays.htm
Group Equates Gays With KKK: Vows No More Disney Gay Days
by Doreen Brandt, 365Gay.com Newscenter, Washington Bureau
Washington, D.C. - A conservative Christian lobby group is vowing to
put an end to the popular Gay Days at Disney World in Florida.
The Virginia based Christian Action Network has been demonstrating
against Gay Days for nearly a decade with little success, but now it says
its campaign is gaining momentum.
The group has a video that it made of this June's annual party at the
Florida theme park and at clubs in the Orlando area that it says shows
"orgies and depravity".
CAN announced Friday it will distribute the tape to news
organizations across the country, and show it to Christian groups and
encourage them to lobby against the popular event. The group says Disney is
promoting "debauchery" and though it has not called for a boycott, it
carefully lists in a news release all of the companies owned by the Disney
Corp. including ABC television.
"I want to point out that this event is not called 'Gay Days in
Orlando,' it's called 'Gay Days at Walt Disney World,'" CAN President Martin
Mawyer said. "And as such, we believe Disney is responsible for all the
activity that takes place under the umbrella of this event, whether it takes
place on Disney property or off Disney property." Many of the parties and
other events that make up Gay Days take place in venues throughout the
Orlando area.
In a media release CAN says the videotape "depicts homosexuals
kissing and fondling each other and engaging in public nudity, simulated sex
acts and alleged drug use at Disney theme parks" but a clip provided shows
only gay men kissing and enjoying water rides at the park. The clip did not
contain nudity or drug use.
"It's absolutely impossible to describe the depth of depravity we
saw," said Mawyer who claims Disney officials tried to have him arrested for
making the tape.
"Not only did we see men kissing men, but these shirtless homosexuals
were twisting the nipples of each other and fondling the butts and groins of
their 'lovers.' And all this occurred right out in the open at a Disney
theme park."
Mawyer said his organization plans to tour 24 cities in 12
southeastern states, showing the video to local media, church leaders and
public officials.
The group is demanding that Walt Disney World prevent Gay Days
organizers from using the Disney name, that the company post signs warning
parents of the event, that it arrest any Gay Days participant who "engages
in unlawful acts of lewdness", that it warn parents before they make
reservations at Disney-owned hotels, and that it reimburse expenses for
guests who are offended by Gay Days.
Disney spokesperson Rena Callahan said the company rejected the
demands saying "Disney does not sponsor Gay Days, it's simply a time of year
when people come to Central Florida."
Mawyer then equated Gay Days with a meeting of the Ku Klux Klan.
"Let's be honest. Disney would never allow an event to be called 'KKK Days
at Walt Disney World'... Disney would use every legal muscle within their
power to have their name removed from that event."
Kennedy likens Vatican stance on gay unions to 'bigotry' Other members of the Rhode Island delegation support civil unions but not same-sex marriage.
Providence Journal, August 6, 2003
75 Fountain St., Providence, RI, 02902
(Fax: 401-277-7346 ) (E-Mail: letters@projo.com )
( http://www.projo.com )
http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20030806_gay6.9596e.html
Kennedy likens Vatican stance on gay unions to 'bigotry'
Other members of the Rhode Island delegation support civil unions but not
same-sex marriage.
By Michael Corkery, Journal Staff Writer
U.S. Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy has charged into the debate over
same-sex marriage, criticizing the Vatican for its opposition to laws
recognizing gay and lesbian couples.
A member of the country's most legendary Roman Catholic political
family, representing the most Catholic state in the nation, Kennedy said he
refuses to follow the Vatican's edict, issued last week, imploring Catholic
lawmakers to oppose same-sex unions.
"I see the policy of opposing same-sex marriages or unions, whatever
you call it, as bigotry or discrimination," Kennedy said yesterday in an
interview.
"We are talking about the law here and whether the law is going to
treat people equally here. I don't see where the church or anyone else
dictates what the policy is going to be with respect to treating people
equally," he said.
Kennedy is the most vocal member of the Rhode Island delegation in
both his support for same-sex unions and his willingness to defy the
Catholic Church on the issue.
Kennedy dismisses the distinction between civil unions and gay
marriage as merely semantics. But other members of the delegation say it's
a significant difference in the eyes of many Americans, saying marriage
should remain exclusively between a man and a woman.
Vermont, the only state to recognize same-sex unions, established a
separate legal code for same-sex or "civil" unions. Vermont does not call
them marriages, but affords the same rights to homosexual couples as
heterosexual couples.
U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, who also is a Catholic, said he supports
extending legal protections and benefits to same-sex couples, but does not
sanction gay marriage. U.S. Rep. James R. Langevin, a Catholic, supports
same-sex unions, but not gay marriage.
Likewise, U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chafee, an Episcopalian, said he supports
civil unions, but not marriage for gays and lesbians, saying the country is
not ready to call it by that name.
Kennedy sent out a news release last week, announcing his position.
Other delegation members, while supporting same-sex unions, said the debate
in Washington should focus more on high unemployment and the war in Iraq
than a divisive issue such as gay marriage.
President Bush raised the issue last week during a rare Rose Garden
news conference, saying White House lawyers were looking to ensure that the
term "marriage" apply only to men and women.
The Vatican followed the next day with a statement that urged all
Catholic lawmakers to oppose same-sex unions.
The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act prohibits federal recognition of gay
marriages.
But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, has
said he wants to go one step further and propose a constitutional amendment
to ban same-sex marriage.
Frist has said a constitutional amendment could be necessary to ban
gay marriages if more states approve same-sex unions.
It's not the first time Kennedy has clashed with the Catholic Church.
In the past, he has bucked the church with his support for abortion rights
and calling for the ordination of female priests.
On the issue of gay rights, Kennedy said the church has strayed from
its teachings. "The church has its doctrines. I don't agree with this
doctrine. I don't agree with many others," he said.
Kennedy continued a short time later: "The very foundation of the
church is about love," he said. "This notion of discrimination is so far
afield of what Jesus' life was all about."
Kennedy said his Catholic identity is important to him.
"The life of Jesus Christ influences my whole notion of public
service," Kennedy said. "It's all about following the example of Jesus, of
service, humility and love."
Kennedy continued: "I am speaking to you as someone who when I hear
the Scripture, I get a very different message of what Jesus was teaching me
than what the church seems to be representing."
Chafee said he support same-sex unions, but he opposses gay marriage
because the country is not ready for this step.
"I am already in favor of civil unions. It doesn't hurt anyone. . .
. People feel this is the commitment they want to make. I respect that."
Chafee said he believed that the Supreme Court, in its recent
decision striking down a Texas law that prohibited gay sexual activity,
opened the way for gay marriage.
The majority opinion in the 6-to-3 ruling in the Texas case does not
specifically address the issue of gay marriage, said Yale Law School Prof.
William Eskridge Jr., an expert on the law of gay marriage.
But Eskridge said the case could remove a significant legal obstacle
to gay marriage, by legalizing sodomy. "The argument was made that if you
could put them in jail for sodomy, why would you allow marriage," he said.
Chafee said he hoped this would not become a hot-button political
issue in the 2004 election. He believes Washington leaders should instead
focus on the economy and national security.
"I recognize this is an issue that can stir up emotionally charged
divisions," he said.
Chafee added that he would not support a constitutional amendment to
ban gay marriage.
Likewise, Reed said he would oppose any constitutional amendment to
ban these unions, which he believes would preempt states from being able to
pass their own laws on the issue.
Reed said yesterday that he supports extending the same legal
protections to committed gay and lesbian couples as those enjoyed by
heterosexual couples. But he said marriage should only apply to men and
women.
As a congressman, Reed voted in favor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage
Act. Kennedy voted against it. Neither Langevin nor Chafee had been elected
to Capitol Hill at the time.
As for the Vatican's edict, Reed said the Catholic Church was an
important influence, but not the only influence. "In a pluralistic society,
you have to listen to a range of voices," he said.
Langevin said yesterday that he supports recognizing civil unions for
gay and lesbian couples, but not calling it marriage.
Speaking from Israel, where he's traveling this week with a group of
congressional Democratics, Langevin said that calling these arrangements
marriage would cloud the issue, which he views as one of equality under the
law.
"At this point, more individuals feel like I do, that same-sex
couples should receive the same benefits [as heterosexual couples],"
Langevin said.
"When we start talking about marriage, it brings in factors outside
the realm of equal rights. It has religious connotations. . . . It brings
in an element that divides people instead of bringing people together."
Langevin said in a written statement that the Catholic Church guides
his personal life.
"However, I believe in a strong separation in church and state. The
greatest influence on an congressperson's decision must be the Constitution
and the interests of his or her constituents. "
75 Fountain St., Providence, RI, 02902
(Fax: 401-277-7346 ) (E-Mail: letters@projo.com )
( http://www.projo.com )
http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20030806_gay6.9596e.html
Kennedy likens Vatican stance on gay unions to 'bigotry'
Other members of the Rhode Island delegation support civil unions but not
same-sex marriage.
By Michael Corkery, Journal Staff Writer
U.S. Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy has charged into the debate over
same-sex marriage, criticizing the Vatican for its opposition to laws
recognizing gay and lesbian couples.
A member of the country's most legendary Roman Catholic political
family, representing the most Catholic state in the nation, Kennedy said he
refuses to follow the Vatican's edict, issued last week, imploring Catholic
lawmakers to oppose same-sex unions.
"I see the policy of opposing same-sex marriages or unions, whatever
you call it, as bigotry or discrimination," Kennedy said yesterday in an
interview.
"We are talking about the law here and whether the law is going to
treat people equally here. I don't see where the church or anyone else
dictates what the policy is going to be with respect to treating people
equally," he said.
Kennedy is the most vocal member of the Rhode Island delegation in
both his support for same-sex unions and his willingness to defy the
Catholic Church on the issue.
Kennedy dismisses the distinction between civil unions and gay
marriage as merely semantics. But other members of the delegation say it's
a significant difference in the eyes of many Americans, saying marriage
should remain exclusively between a man and a woman.
Vermont, the only state to recognize same-sex unions, established a
separate legal code for same-sex or "civil" unions. Vermont does not call
them marriages, but affords the same rights to homosexual couples as
heterosexual couples.
U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, who also is a Catholic, said he supports
extending legal protections and benefits to same-sex couples, but does not
sanction gay marriage. U.S. Rep. James R. Langevin, a Catholic, supports
same-sex unions, but not gay marriage.
Likewise, U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chafee, an Episcopalian, said he supports
civil unions, but not marriage for gays and lesbians, saying the country is
not ready to call it by that name.
Kennedy sent out a news release last week, announcing his position.
Other delegation members, while supporting same-sex unions, said the debate
in Washington should focus more on high unemployment and the war in Iraq
than a divisive issue such as gay marriage.
President Bush raised the issue last week during a rare Rose Garden
news conference, saying White House lawyers were looking to ensure that the
term "marriage" apply only to men and women.
The Vatican followed the next day with a statement that urged all
Catholic lawmakers to oppose same-sex unions.
The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act prohibits federal recognition of gay
marriages.
But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, has
said he wants to go one step further and propose a constitutional amendment
to ban same-sex marriage.
Frist has said a constitutional amendment could be necessary to ban
gay marriages if more states approve same-sex unions.
It's not the first time Kennedy has clashed with the Catholic Church.
In the past, he has bucked the church with his support for abortion rights
and calling for the ordination of female priests.
On the issue of gay rights, Kennedy said the church has strayed from
its teachings. "The church has its doctrines. I don't agree with this
doctrine. I don't agree with many others," he said.
Kennedy continued a short time later: "The very foundation of the
church is about love," he said. "This notion of discrimination is so far
afield of what Jesus' life was all about."
Kennedy said his Catholic identity is important to him.
"The life of Jesus Christ influences my whole notion of public
service," Kennedy said. "It's all about following the example of Jesus, of
service, humility and love."
Kennedy continued: "I am speaking to you as someone who when I hear
the Scripture, I get a very different message of what Jesus was teaching me
than what the church seems to be representing."
Chafee said he support same-sex unions, but he opposses gay marriage
because the country is not ready for this step.
"I am already in favor of civil unions. It doesn't hurt anyone. . .
. People feel this is the commitment they want to make. I respect that."
Chafee said he believed that the Supreme Court, in its recent
decision striking down a Texas law that prohibited gay sexual activity,
opened the way for gay marriage.
The majority opinion in the 6-to-3 ruling in the Texas case does not
specifically address the issue of gay marriage, said Yale Law School Prof.
William Eskridge Jr., an expert on the law of gay marriage.
But Eskridge said the case could remove a significant legal obstacle
to gay marriage, by legalizing sodomy. "The argument was made that if you
could put them in jail for sodomy, why would you allow marriage," he said.
Chafee said he hoped this would not become a hot-button political
issue in the 2004 election. He believes Washington leaders should instead
focus on the economy and national security.
"I recognize this is an issue that can stir up emotionally charged
divisions," he said.
Chafee added that he would not support a constitutional amendment to
ban gay marriage.
Likewise, Reed said he would oppose any constitutional amendment to
ban these unions, which he believes would preempt states from being able to
pass their own laws on the issue.
Reed said yesterday that he supports extending the same legal
protections to committed gay and lesbian couples as those enjoyed by
heterosexual couples. But he said marriage should only apply to men and
women.
As a congressman, Reed voted in favor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage
Act. Kennedy voted against it. Neither Langevin nor Chafee had been elected
to Capitol Hill at the time.
As for the Vatican's edict, Reed said the Catholic Church was an
important influence, but not the only influence. "In a pluralistic society,
you have to listen to a range of voices," he said.
Langevin said yesterday that he supports recognizing civil unions for
gay and lesbian couples, but not calling it marriage.
Speaking from Israel, where he's traveling this week with a group of
congressional Democratics, Langevin said that calling these arrangements
marriage would cloud the issue, which he views as one of equality under the
law.
"At this point, more individuals feel like I do, that same-sex
couples should receive the same benefits [as heterosexual couples],"
Langevin said.
"When we start talking about marriage, it brings in factors outside
the realm of equal rights. It has religious connotations. . . . It brings
in an element that divides people instead of bringing people together."
Langevin said in a written statement that the Catholic Church guides
his personal life.
"However, I believe in a strong separation in church and state. The
greatest influence on an congressperson's decision must be the Constitution
and the interests of his or her constituents. "
Gay Uzbek journalist pleads guilty to sodomy charges, may have been tortured, outh Carolina Considers Banning Gay Adoption
1. ADVOCATE.COM (glbt) Gay Uzbek journalist pleads guilty to sodomy charges, may have been tortured
2. CONCORD MONITOR (New Hampshire) For gays, a symbol of hope: New Hampshire's libertarian tradition provided a supportive environment for the
first gay bishop.
3. GAY.COM U.K. Namesake would oppose gay high school, says Harvey Milk's family
4. 365GAY.COM South Carolina Considers Banning Gay Adoption
5. SUDBURY STAR (Ontario) 'We will have the right to marry': Same-sex
marriages gives city's 2003 Pride Parade added boost
Advocate.com (glbt), August 11, 2003
http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=9552&sd=08/11/03
Uzbek journalist pleads guilty to sodomy charges
An Uzbek journalist charged with sodomy has pleaded guilty at his
closed trial and dismissed his lawyers, according to rights activists who
alleged Monday that his actions were the result of pressure from the
authorities. Ruslan Sharipov said at a hearing Friday he was ready to admit
his guilt on all charges and apologize to President Islam Karimov and other
officials for criticizing them in his articles, according to Surat Ikramov,
an activist who has been helping defend Sharipov in court. Sharipov
dismissed Ikramov and his lawyer, Ravil Gayazov, and also requested that his
mother not be allowed to attend hearings. Sharipov earlier maintained his
innocence and said the case against him was fabricated. The trial began
July 16.
Sharipov, 25, a journalist who leads an independent civil rights
group that focuses on protecting media freedom, was arrested May 26 and
accused of having sex with another man, having sex with minors, and running
a brothel.
Sharipov, who is openly gay, faces up to three years in prison if
convicted under a Soviet-era law banning sodomy that is still part of the
Uzbek criminal code. If found guilty on the other charges, Sharipov could
face another five years.
International human rights groups have strongly protested Sharipov's
arrest, calling it politically motivated persecution. A Human Rights Watch
researcher in Uzbekistan, Matilda Bogner, said Monday that she believes
authorities either tortured Sharipov or threatened him with torture to make
him plead guilty. Sharipov said in earlier letters from prison that he had
been under heavy psychological pressure.
Ikramov said that Sharipov told his lawyers after Friday's hearing
that he had been forced to give up attempts to defend himself out of
consideration for his own security and the security of his mother and
lawyers.
Concord Monitor, August 11, 2003
Box 1177, Concord, NH, 03302-1177
(Fax: 603-224-8120 ) (E-Mail: letters@cmonitor.com )
( http://www.concordmonitor.com/ )
http://www.cmonitor.com/stories/news/local2003/081003robinson_nh_2003.shtml
For gays, a symbol of hope
New Hampshire's libertarian tradition provided a supportive environment for
the first gay bishop.
By Lisa Wangsness, Monitor staff
New Hampshire is best-known for its first-in-the-nation presidential
primary, one of the last craggy outposts of old-fashioned American
politicking. A catalogue of the state's claims to fame might also list Bike
Week, NASCAR, moose hunting, conservative government, low taxes, cheap booze
and the late Old Man of the Mountain.
"I want you to know that New Hampshire is not particularly an
epicenter of gay culture," said outgoing Bishop Doug Theuner, gently hinting
at this context when he addressed the House of Bishops at the Episcopal
Church's general convention in Minneapolis last week. "It is not one of the
most sophisticated places in the country."
And yet New Hampshire Episcopalians, not their brethren in New York
or California, elected the first openly gay bishop in the 73 million-member
worldwide Anglican communion. The Rev. Canon Gene Robinson's confirmation
in Minneapolis shook the foundation of the Anglican communion; the
institutional reverberations could be felt for years to come. And Robinson,
a humble priest from rural Weare, has become a symbol of progress and hope
to the gay community around the world.
But even if it was somewhat startling to see "New Hampshire" and
"gay" in the same headline of every major news outlet last week, many people
who know New Hampshire well aren't so surprised that a gay man could rise to
the highest echelon of moral and religious authority here - or that the
state's delegation would stand behind their decision, even despite threats
of a church schism. While Robinson's particular qualifications made him an
obvious choice for bishop, New Hampshire's libertarian tradition, the
state's growing acceptance of gay legal rights and its distaste for anti-gay
invective provided an ideal environment for his success.
"It doesn't surprise me that this happened here," said Paul Mirski, a
former House member from Enfield and a leader of the conservative House
Republican Alliance. "Coming from New Hampshire, that was always one of the
real assets of the state - it's very tolerant."
In just the past few years, New Hampshire has seen the election of a
gay state senator who was outed against his will, a repeal of a ban on gay
adoption and the rejection of a nominee to the state Human Rights Commission
who was accused of making homophobic remarks.
A neighbor for 28 years
Church leaders have repeatedly emphasized that Robinson's election
was neither because nor in spite of his homosexuality. Rather, they said,
Robinson proved himself as a skilled pastor, involved neighbor and devoted
friend over nearly three decades of service in the New Hampshire diocese.
"New Hampshire has elected a man who has been part of their life for
28 years," Theuner told the House of Bishops. "I doubt there are many
people who have ever been elected bishop who have been better known by the
people who elected them."
Andrew Rapp, the editor of Boston-based Bay Windows, New England's
largest gay newspaper, said Robinson's achievement wasn't surprising given
his longstanding ties in a close-knit state.
"It's been my experience that progress within religious institutions
on being accepting and supportive of gay people usually comes through
long-term efforts, particularly in places where someone who is openly gay
has been involved for a long period of time," he said.
And, in typical New Hampshire fashion, once Episcopals here chose
Robinson as their bishop, the state delegation stood fast on the argument
that the national convention should honor local decisions.
"That was one of our major points at the convention," said the Rev.
Hank Junkin, rector of St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Hopkinton. "It's a
kind of diocesan-rights kind of thing - we have the right to elect our
leader."
Granite Staters prize local control, and they tend to balk when
outsiders meddle in their affairs. Junkin, who is also the chaplain of the
House of Representatives, recalled that during the last presidential primary
campaign, the House booed then-candidate Gary Bauer when he disparaged gay
adoption in a speech to the lower chamber - never mind that the issue was
hotly debated on the very same floor just two years earlier.
"We can have a family fight in New Hampshire about this, but we don't
appreciate outsiders coming in and telling us what to do," Junkin said.
But even if Robinson's pastoral and personal attributes got him
elected bishop, it is certainly worth noting that his sexuality didn't
prevent him from becoming a respected church leader. That, many here say,
suggests New Hampshire's cherished libertarian sensibility is thriving.
Leaving each other alone
"Historically, this state has been a place where people left other
people alone," Mirski said. "You don't have to agree with the behavior, but
unless there is some terrible social consequence from the behavior, you
ought to let it go. And I think that's a good thing."
Some gay people say New Hampshire isn't merely tolerant of
homosexuality, but quite accepting. Andy LaBrie, a housing specialist at
the local Community Action Program, said he mentioned his partner during a
recent meeting without even thinking. Afterward, a colleague told him she
thought it was "really cool" that he felt safe enough to come out at work.
"I thought, 'Hmmm, I don't know anyplace in New Hampshire I don't
feel safe doing that,'" he said.
LaBrie founded the Merrimack County AIDS Project to provide youth
education and housing and financial assistance to HIV/AIDS patients. He
started with a few hundred dollars at his dining room table in the early
1990s; when he left the organization 10 years later, the group had a budget
of $3.3 million.
"The folks who supported us were just regular people from Concord,"
he said.
A recent UNH poll on gay marriage - probably the most divisive gay
issue - suggests that New Hampshire is relatively open to the idea of
expanding gay rights. The poll found that 54 percent of New Hampshire
residents favor a law that would allow the state to issue marriage licenses
to gay and lesbian couples.
"I think it reflects the libertarian streak you see in New
Hampshire," said Andy Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center. "There is a
real sense among people along the political spectrum that it's none of their
business."
But Mo Baxley, a gay activist, disputed the notion that
libertarianism alone has made New Hampshire a receptive environment for gays
and lesbians.
"Gene's appointment didn't happen in a vacuum," she said.
"New Hampshire is arguably in the top three states in the nation with
laws protecting gays and lesbians. We've discussed these issues in the
state over and over again - that has to have an impact; in a sense, we've
created a safe place for these things to happen."
An evolving public attitude
Baxley said New Hampshire's attitude toward gays and lesbians has
changed dramatically since she came out in 1977.
"I can remember back in the '70s and '80s, you thought about your
physical safety all the time," she said. "People routinely got beaten up
walking in and out of clubs, being in the wrong place or the wrong meeting
at the wrong time."
Fear of gay-bashing is still a concern for her and other people she
knows, she said, but "it's just not ever-present" now.
Baxley is also on the board of Concord Outright, a group that
provides a safe place for teenagers to discuss sexuality. That has given
her a window on how the social climate has warmed to gay people here. Some
teenagers feel comfortable enough to come out in high school now; Baxley
said that would have hardly been imaginable in her youth. And gay teens
have organizations like Outright to help them build social networks.
In addition to the growing influence of increasingly gay-friendly
mass media, Baxley attributes the cultural shift to the conversations about
gay legal rights that have routinely taken place at the State House in
recent years.
In the 1970s, New Hampshire repealed its ban on sodomy. In the late
1980s, it enacted a hate crimes law that specifically addressed sexual
orientation.
The Legislature repealed a ban on gay adoption in 1997, nine years
after its enactment. On the House floor, one seemingly unlikely supporter
of the repeal, Rep. Richard "Stretch" Kennedy, a Republican from Hopkinton,
declared: "It is reasonable and it is right."
In the same session, the Legislature also banned discrimination in
employment, housing and public accommodations based on sexual orientation.
While New Hampshire doesn't recognize gay civil unions or gay marriage, year
after year, the Legislature has defeated attempts to ban recognition of
civil unions established elsewhere, or to define marriage in heterosexual
terms.
In fact, Mirski, a proponent of one of the failed bills that would
have defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, said he emerged
from the debate feeling that he could support a civil unions law, though he
still thinks marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples.
"Marriage is a contract," he said. "I don't see why we can't have
contracts between same-sex individuals."
Like most other states, New Hampshire has seen its share of anti-gay
bigotry.
"Is there a hateful element in New Hampshire?" said Rep. Raymond
Buckley, a Democrat from Manchester who is gay.
"Of course - there is going to be a hateful element in every
community on this planet. But is that a majority? Absolutely not."
Indeed, in recent years, New Hampshire has generally turned a cold
shoulder to those perceived to have a strident anti-gay agenda.
In 1998, for example, the Manchester Union Leader ran news stories
linking then-Senate candidate Rick Trombly of Boscawen to a gay men's
organization whose Web site included links to sites selling sex toys. On
Election Day, voters chose Trombly over Republican incumbent Amy Patenaude.
This year, Republican Gov. Craig Benson nominated former
representative Gary Daniels to serve on the state Human Rights Commission.
Newspapers quickly reported that Daniels had suggested homosexuality was
immoral during a 1997 House debate; in his defense, Daniels told reporters
he felt the state shouldn't prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation. A majority of the all-Republican Executive Council publicly
opposed Daniels's nomination, and Benson withdrew it.
"My feeling is the man has made a determination against a single
segment of society, and I can't support that," Councilor Ruth Griffin said
at the time. "We're all human beings, and we're all the same."
Gay.com U.K., 11 August 2003
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/4853
Namesake would oppose gay high school, says family
Harvey Milk, the gay civil rights leader whose name is being used for
the world's first fully gay high school, would have opposed the segregation
the school stands for, according to his family.
Speaking to the New York Post, Andy Milk, the nephew of the first
openly gay elected official in San Francisco, says Harvey would have fought
against the school for singling out gay youths.
Harvey "fought for integration and acceptance of the gay community
and other minorities into mainstream society", Andy said.
"If you want to honour the man - fine. But make it equal for
everyone," he told the newspaper. "Segregation is not what he stood for.
He was for equal rights for everyone."
The school was announced last month as a safe haven for LBGT
children. However, it has since been criticised as supporting "modern
apartheid" rather than dealing with homophobic bullying.
This was acknowledged by Christopher Rodriguez, assistant executive
director at the Hetrick Martin Institute, which runs the school.
"If only there did not have to be a Harvey Milk School," he said in a
press release, before reminding us that unfortunately, "there does have to
be a Harvey Milk School".
Harvey Milk was assassinated in 1978 by Daniel White, an anti-gay
conservative who became unhinged when he lost his seat in city hall.
http://www.365gay.com/NewsContent/081103scAdopt.htm
South Carolina Considers Banning Gay Adoption
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Charleston, South Carolina - Legislation before the South Carolina
legislature would bar gays and lesbians from adopting.
The bill, written by state Sen. Mike Fair (R-Greenville) is now in
the Senate Judiciary Committee. Fair has been trying to get similar
legislation passed for several years, but believes it now will succeed
because of what he calls a backlash against gays. He cites reaction in the
conservative state to the US Supreme Court ruling on sodomy and the push to
legalize gay marriage across the country. South Carolina already has DOMA,
a so-called defense of marriage law that bans same-sex marriage.
The state currently does not prevent gays from adopting. "Were
looking for a safe and stable home for a child," Department of Social
Services spokesperson Jerry Adams told the Charleston Post and Courier.
"The sexual practices of the parent are not something that's questioned."
Fair's bill, if enacted, would prevent the agency from placing a
child in any home where the child would be exposed to sexual practices
outside of marriage.
Fair said he agrees with the Vatican that children in homes with
same-sex parents are at a developmental disadvantage.
"This isn't rocket science," said Fair, a Baptist. "People who try
to defend that are concerned about political correctness."
The Most Rev. Robert Baker, bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of
Charleston, supports Fair's legislation.
Local gay activist Warren Redman-Gress said that state legislators
before endorsing Fair's bill should read the position of the American
Academy of Pediatrics which two years ago issued a statement saying
"children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and
the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can
children whose parents are heterosexual."
Sudbury Star, August 11, 2003
33 MacKenzie St., Sudbury, Ontario P3C 4Y1Canada
(Fax: 705-674-0624) ( http://www.thesudburystar.com )
http://www.thesudburystar.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=40250&c
atname=Local+News
'We will have the right to marry'
Same-sex marriages gives city's 2003 Pride Parade added boost
By Harold Carmichael, The Sudbury Star
Thirty years ago, a giant, white condom leading a parade down Elm
Street in downtown Sudbury would have been unthinkable.
But on Saturday afternoon, a man in a giant Lifestyles condom
costume, several drag queens and about 85 others were barely noticed. While
there weren't many people in the downtown, the handful of onlookers who
stopped to watch the annual Pride Parade pass looked on in curiosity. There
was no heckling or catcalls.
The closest the parade got to opposition was one silent protester,
who walked alongside parade participants with a sign that read "your pride
is your shame."
It's indicative of how far Sudbury's gay and lesbian community has
come since the first Pride Parades were held back in the early 1990s.
"There's a lot of young people out today," said Chantal Rozon,
co-chairwoman of Pride Week 2003. "My parent's generation is not here.
(But) they are the ones giving us the liberty to do this."
Rozon added that the Pride Week Committee handed out a survey to all
parade participants in order to identify the needs and issues of the local
gay and lesbian community. She said it's possible the survey could produce
links with other gay and lesbian communities across the northeast.
The issue of same-sex marriage was on the minds of many parade
participants. Rozon said she believes the issue is a done deal and won't be
torpedoed either by a backbench Liberal MP revolt in the House of Commons or
by the efforts of churches.
"It's going to happen," she said. "We will have the right to marry.
We now have the right to say no and the right to say yes. I think we have
gotten over pretty much answering the question."
Rozon said she expected the Roman Catholic Church to come out against
same-sex marriage.
"You look at Pope John Paul," she said. "He's from the old school,
my parents' generation ... With the Catholic faith, those are driven
beliefs. People have had beliefs driven into them. It's very hard to
change those beliefs. But my generation, the next generation, it's a new
voice coming in."
Mayoral candidate Brian Gatien stopped by before the parade started
to talk to participants.
"The idea is to create an air of tolerance, not just for gays and
lesbians, but for all in this community," he said.
Gatien, who became aware of gay pride activities while studying law
at Osgoode Hall in Toronto many years ago, said that there is a growing
acceptance in Sudbury today about the pride parade, gays and lesbians.
"I think it's a measure of how the community is more comfortable," he
said.
"They are more accepting of who they are and I think the community is
more comfortable with this style of parade."
Pride Week committee member Jennifer Gregoire told parade
participants before the event started that such an event is necessary to let
others know that there are gays and lesbians living in the city.
"Days like this give us the opportunity to show the community we are
here, we have faces and we will not stop until days like this no longer
exist," she said, to loud cheers.
"We are here. We are proud. And we are not going anywhere."
Sudbury Regional Hospital CEO Vickie Kaminski, who has several gay
friends and also came out to a Pride Parade several years ago to show
support for them, said she expects to see Sudbury's and other cities' Pride
Parades continue for many more years.
"I think when we have to talk of tolerance, it means we still have
the problem," she said.
"I don't think we have to 'tolerate' someone. When people have to
come and demonstrate, it means we are not there yet."
Very divisive
Kaminski said the issue of same-sex marriage could turn out to be a
very divisive one across Canada.
"I think it's a long way from being settled," she said. "It's one of
those issues. The two sides - they are very diametrically opposed."
The lone Pride Parade protester, Robert Cram, 34, of Sudbury, said
that as a Christian, he felt he had to make a statement against the parade.
"I'm just demonstrating," he said. "I'm not going to interrupt their
festivities ... It's something I have to express some opposition to."
Cram said he is opposed to same-sex marriages.
"It's not something that should happen," he said. "It's going to be
a pretty big issue and the church is being strongly influenced by it."
2. CONCORD MONITOR (New Hampshire) For gays, a symbol of hope: New Hampshire's libertarian tradition provided a supportive environment for the
first gay bishop.
3. GAY.COM U.K. Namesake would oppose gay high school, says Harvey Milk's family
4. 365GAY.COM South Carolina Considers Banning Gay Adoption
5. SUDBURY STAR (Ontario) 'We will have the right to marry': Same-sex
marriages gives city's 2003 Pride Parade added boost
Advocate.com (glbt), August 11, 2003
http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?ID=9552&sd=08/11/03
Uzbek journalist pleads guilty to sodomy charges
An Uzbek journalist charged with sodomy has pleaded guilty at his
closed trial and dismissed his lawyers, according to rights activists who
alleged Monday that his actions were the result of pressure from the
authorities. Ruslan Sharipov said at a hearing Friday he was ready to admit
his guilt on all charges and apologize to President Islam Karimov and other
officials for criticizing them in his articles, according to Surat Ikramov,
an activist who has been helping defend Sharipov in court. Sharipov
dismissed Ikramov and his lawyer, Ravil Gayazov, and also requested that his
mother not be allowed to attend hearings. Sharipov earlier maintained his
innocence and said the case against him was fabricated. The trial began
July 16.
Sharipov, 25, a journalist who leads an independent civil rights
group that focuses on protecting media freedom, was arrested May 26 and
accused of having sex with another man, having sex with minors, and running
a brothel.
Sharipov, who is openly gay, faces up to three years in prison if
convicted under a Soviet-era law banning sodomy that is still part of the
Uzbek criminal code. If found guilty on the other charges, Sharipov could
face another five years.
International human rights groups have strongly protested Sharipov's
arrest, calling it politically motivated persecution. A Human Rights Watch
researcher in Uzbekistan, Matilda Bogner, said Monday that she believes
authorities either tortured Sharipov or threatened him with torture to make
him plead guilty. Sharipov said in earlier letters from prison that he had
been under heavy psychological pressure.
Ikramov said that Sharipov told his lawyers after Friday's hearing
that he had been forced to give up attempts to defend himself out of
consideration for his own security and the security of his mother and
lawyers.
Concord Monitor, August 11, 2003
Box 1177, Concord, NH, 03302-1177
(Fax: 603-224-8120 ) (E-Mail: letters@cmonitor.com )
( http://www.concordmonitor.com/ )
http://www.cmonitor.com/stories/news/local2003/081003robinson_nh_2003.shtml
For gays, a symbol of hope
New Hampshire's libertarian tradition provided a supportive environment for
the first gay bishop.
By Lisa Wangsness, Monitor staff
New Hampshire is best-known for its first-in-the-nation presidential
primary, one of the last craggy outposts of old-fashioned American
politicking. A catalogue of the state's claims to fame might also list Bike
Week, NASCAR, moose hunting, conservative government, low taxes, cheap booze
and the late Old Man of the Mountain.
"I want you to know that New Hampshire is not particularly an
epicenter of gay culture," said outgoing Bishop Doug Theuner, gently hinting
at this context when he addressed the House of Bishops at the Episcopal
Church's general convention in Minneapolis last week. "It is not one of the
most sophisticated places in the country."
And yet New Hampshire Episcopalians, not their brethren in New York
or California, elected the first openly gay bishop in the 73 million-member
worldwide Anglican communion. The Rev. Canon Gene Robinson's confirmation
in Minneapolis shook the foundation of the Anglican communion; the
institutional reverberations could be felt for years to come. And Robinson,
a humble priest from rural Weare, has become a symbol of progress and hope
to the gay community around the world.
But even if it was somewhat startling to see "New Hampshire" and
"gay" in the same headline of every major news outlet last week, many people
who know New Hampshire well aren't so surprised that a gay man could rise to
the highest echelon of moral and religious authority here - or that the
state's delegation would stand behind their decision, even despite threats
of a church schism. While Robinson's particular qualifications made him an
obvious choice for bishop, New Hampshire's libertarian tradition, the
state's growing acceptance of gay legal rights and its distaste for anti-gay
invective provided an ideal environment for his success.
"It doesn't surprise me that this happened here," said Paul Mirski, a
former House member from Enfield and a leader of the conservative House
Republican Alliance. "Coming from New Hampshire, that was always one of the
real assets of the state - it's very tolerant."
In just the past few years, New Hampshire has seen the election of a
gay state senator who was outed against his will, a repeal of a ban on gay
adoption and the rejection of a nominee to the state Human Rights Commission
who was accused of making homophobic remarks.
A neighbor for 28 years
Church leaders have repeatedly emphasized that Robinson's election
was neither because nor in spite of his homosexuality. Rather, they said,
Robinson proved himself as a skilled pastor, involved neighbor and devoted
friend over nearly three decades of service in the New Hampshire diocese.
"New Hampshire has elected a man who has been part of their life for
28 years," Theuner told the House of Bishops. "I doubt there are many
people who have ever been elected bishop who have been better known by the
people who elected them."
Andrew Rapp, the editor of Boston-based Bay Windows, New England's
largest gay newspaper, said Robinson's achievement wasn't surprising given
his longstanding ties in a close-knit state.
"It's been my experience that progress within religious institutions
on being accepting and supportive of gay people usually comes through
long-term efforts, particularly in places where someone who is openly gay
has been involved for a long period of time," he said.
And, in typical New Hampshire fashion, once Episcopals here chose
Robinson as their bishop, the state delegation stood fast on the argument
that the national convention should honor local decisions.
"That was one of our major points at the convention," said the Rev.
Hank Junkin, rector of St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Hopkinton. "It's a
kind of diocesan-rights kind of thing - we have the right to elect our
leader."
Granite Staters prize local control, and they tend to balk when
outsiders meddle in their affairs. Junkin, who is also the chaplain of the
House of Representatives, recalled that during the last presidential primary
campaign, the House booed then-candidate Gary Bauer when he disparaged gay
adoption in a speech to the lower chamber - never mind that the issue was
hotly debated on the very same floor just two years earlier.
"We can have a family fight in New Hampshire about this, but we don't
appreciate outsiders coming in and telling us what to do," Junkin said.
But even if Robinson's pastoral and personal attributes got him
elected bishop, it is certainly worth noting that his sexuality didn't
prevent him from becoming a respected church leader. That, many here say,
suggests New Hampshire's cherished libertarian sensibility is thriving.
Leaving each other alone
"Historically, this state has been a place where people left other
people alone," Mirski said. "You don't have to agree with the behavior, but
unless there is some terrible social consequence from the behavior, you
ought to let it go. And I think that's a good thing."
Some gay people say New Hampshire isn't merely tolerant of
homosexuality, but quite accepting. Andy LaBrie, a housing specialist at
the local Community Action Program, said he mentioned his partner during a
recent meeting without even thinking. Afterward, a colleague told him she
thought it was "really cool" that he felt safe enough to come out at work.
"I thought, 'Hmmm, I don't know anyplace in New Hampshire I don't
feel safe doing that,'" he said.
LaBrie founded the Merrimack County AIDS Project to provide youth
education and housing and financial assistance to HIV/AIDS patients. He
started with a few hundred dollars at his dining room table in the early
1990s; when he left the organization 10 years later, the group had a budget
of $3.3 million.
"The folks who supported us were just regular people from Concord,"
he said.
A recent UNH poll on gay marriage - probably the most divisive gay
issue - suggests that New Hampshire is relatively open to the idea of
expanding gay rights. The poll found that 54 percent of New Hampshire
residents favor a law that would allow the state to issue marriage licenses
to gay and lesbian couples.
"I think it reflects the libertarian streak you see in New
Hampshire," said Andy Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center. "There is a
real sense among people along the political spectrum that it's none of their
business."
But Mo Baxley, a gay activist, disputed the notion that
libertarianism alone has made New Hampshire a receptive environment for gays
and lesbians.
"Gene's appointment didn't happen in a vacuum," she said.
"New Hampshire is arguably in the top three states in the nation with
laws protecting gays and lesbians. We've discussed these issues in the
state over and over again - that has to have an impact; in a sense, we've
created a safe place for these things to happen."
An evolving public attitude
Baxley said New Hampshire's attitude toward gays and lesbians has
changed dramatically since she came out in 1977.
"I can remember back in the '70s and '80s, you thought about your
physical safety all the time," she said. "People routinely got beaten up
walking in and out of clubs, being in the wrong place or the wrong meeting
at the wrong time."
Fear of gay-bashing is still a concern for her and other people she
knows, she said, but "it's just not ever-present" now.
Baxley is also on the board of Concord Outright, a group that
provides a safe place for teenagers to discuss sexuality. That has given
her a window on how the social climate has warmed to gay people here. Some
teenagers feel comfortable enough to come out in high school now; Baxley
said that would have hardly been imaginable in her youth. And gay teens
have organizations like Outright to help them build social networks.
In addition to the growing influence of increasingly gay-friendly
mass media, Baxley attributes the cultural shift to the conversations about
gay legal rights that have routinely taken place at the State House in
recent years.
In the 1970s, New Hampshire repealed its ban on sodomy. In the late
1980s, it enacted a hate crimes law that specifically addressed sexual
orientation.
The Legislature repealed a ban on gay adoption in 1997, nine years
after its enactment. On the House floor, one seemingly unlikely supporter
of the repeal, Rep. Richard "Stretch" Kennedy, a Republican from Hopkinton,
declared: "It is reasonable and it is right."
In the same session, the Legislature also banned discrimination in
employment, housing and public accommodations based on sexual orientation.
While New Hampshire doesn't recognize gay civil unions or gay marriage, year
after year, the Legislature has defeated attempts to ban recognition of
civil unions established elsewhere, or to define marriage in heterosexual
terms.
In fact, Mirski, a proponent of one of the failed bills that would
have defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, said he emerged
from the debate feeling that he could support a civil unions law, though he
still thinks marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples.
"Marriage is a contract," he said. "I don't see why we can't have
contracts between same-sex individuals."
Like most other states, New Hampshire has seen its share of anti-gay
bigotry.
"Is there a hateful element in New Hampshire?" said Rep. Raymond
Buckley, a Democrat from Manchester who is gay.
"Of course - there is going to be a hateful element in every
community on this planet. But is that a majority? Absolutely not."
Indeed, in recent years, New Hampshire has generally turned a cold
shoulder to those perceived to have a strident anti-gay agenda.
In 1998, for example, the Manchester Union Leader ran news stories
linking then-Senate candidate Rick Trombly of Boscawen to a gay men's
organization whose Web site included links to sites selling sex toys. On
Election Day, voters chose Trombly over Republican incumbent Amy Patenaude.
This year, Republican Gov. Craig Benson nominated former
representative Gary Daniels to serve on the state Human Rights Commission.
Newspapers quickly reported that Daniels had suggested homosexuality was
immoral during a 1997 House debate; in his defense, Daniels told reporters
he felt the state shouldn't prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation. A majority of the all-Republican Executive Council publicly
opposed Daniels's nomination, and Benson withdrew it.
"My feeling is the man has made a determination against a single
segment of society, and I can't support that," Councilor Ruth Griffin said
at the time. "We're all human beings, and we're all the same."
Gay.com U.K., 11 August 2003
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/4853
Namesake would oppose gay high school, says family
Harvey Milk, the gay civil rights leader whose name is being used for
the world's first fully gay high school, would have opposed the segregation
the school stands for, according to his family.
Speaking to the New York Post, Andy Milk, the nephew of the first
openly gay elected official in San Francisco, says Harvey would have fought
against the school for singling out gay youths.
Harvey "fought for integration and acceptance of the gay community
and other minorities into mainstream society", Andy said.
"If you want to honour the man - fine. But make it equal for
everyone," he told the newspaper. "Segregation is not what he stood for.
He was for equal rights for everyone."
The school was announced last month as a safe haven for LBGT
children. However, it has since been criticised as supporting "modern
apartheid" rather than dealing with homophobic bullying.
This was acknowledged by Christopher Rodriguez, assistant executive
director at the Hetrick Martin Institute, which runs the school.
"If only there did not have to be a Harvey Milk School," he said in a
press release, before reminding us that unfortunately, "there does have to
be a Harvey Milk School".
Harvey Milk was assassinated in 1978 by Daniel White, an anti-gay
conservative who became unhinged when he lost his seat in city hall.
http://www.365gay.com/NewsContent/081103scAdopt.htm
South Carolina Considers Banning Gay Adoption
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff
Charleston, South Carolina - Legislation before the South Carolina
legislature would bar gays and lesbians from adopting.
The bill, written by state Sen. Mike Fair (R-Greenville) is now in
the Senate Judiciary Committee. Fair has been trying to get similar
legislation passed for several years, but believes it now will succeed
because of what he calls a backlash against gays. He cites reaction in the
conservative state to the US Supreme Court ruling on sodomy and the push to
legalize gay marriage across the country. South Carolina already has DOMA,
a so-called defense of marriage law that bans same-sex marriage.
The state currently does not prevent gays from adopting. "Were
looking for a safe and stable home for a child," Department of Social
Services spokesperson Jerry Adams told the Charleston Post and Courier.
"The sexual practices of the parent are not something that's questioned."
Fair's bill, if enacted, would prevent the agency from placing a
child in any home where the child would be exposed to sexual practices
outside of marriage.
Fair said he agrees with the Vatican that children in homes with
same-sex parents are at a developmental disadvantage.
"This isn't rocket science," said Fair, a Baptist. "People who try
to defend that are concerned about political correctness."
The Most Rev. Robert Baker, bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of
Charleston, supports Fair's legislation.
Local gay activist Warren Redman-Gress said that state legislators
before endorsing Fair's bill should read the position of the American
Academy of Pediatrics which two years ago issued a statement saying
"children with parents who are homosexual can have the same advantages and
the same expectations for health, adjustment, and development as can
children whose parents are heterosexual."
Sudbury Star, August 11, 2003
33 MacKenzie St., Sudbury, Ontario P3C 4Y1Canada
(Fax: 705-674-0624) ( http://www.thesudburystar.com )
http://www.thesudburystar.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=40250&c
atname=Local+News
'We will have the right to marry'
Same-sex marriages gives city's 2003 Pride Parade added boost
By Harold Carmichael, The Sudbury Star
Thirty years ago, a giant, white condom leading a parade down Elm
Street in downtown Sudbury would have been unthinkable.
But on Saturday afternoon, a man in a giant Lifestyles condom
costume, several drag queens and about 85 others were barely noticed. While
there weren't many people in the downtown, the handful of onlookers who
stopped to watch the annual Pride Parade pass looked on in curiosity. There
was no heckling or catcalls.
The closest the parade got to opposition was one silent protester,
who walked alongside parade participants with a sign that read "your pride
is your shame."
It's indicative of how far Sudbury's gay and lesbian community has
come since the first Pride Parades were held back in the early 1990s.
"There's a lot of young people out today," said Chantal Rozon,
co-chairwoman of Pride Week 2003. "My parent's generation is not here.
(But) they are the ones giving us the liberty to do this."
Rozon added that the Pride Week Committee handed out a survey to all
parade participants in order to identify the needs and issues of the local
gay and lesbian community. She said it's possible the survey could produce
links with other gay and lesbian communities across the northeast.
The issue of same-sex marriage was on the minds of many parade
participants. Rozon said she believes the issue is a done deal and won't be
torpedoed either by a backbench Liberal MP revolt in the House of Commons or
by the efforts of churches.
"It's going to happen," she said. "We will have the right to marry.
We now have the right to say no and the right to say yes. I think we have
gotten over pretty much answering the question."
Rozon said she expected the Roman Catholic Church to come out against
same-sex marriage.
"You look at Pope John Paul," she said. "He's from the old school,
my parents' generation ... With the Catholic faith, those are driven
beliefs. People have had beliefs driven into them. It's very hard to
change those beliefs. But my generation, the next generation, it's a new
voice coming in."
Mayoral candidate Brian Gatien stopped by before the parade started
to talk to participants.
"The idea is to create an air of tolerance, not just for gays and
lesbians, but for all in this community," he said.
Gatien, who became aware of gay pride activities while studying law
at Osgoode Hall in Toronto many years ago, said that there is a growing
acceptance in Sudbury today about the pride parade, gays and lesbians.
"I think it's a measure of how the community is more comfortable," he
said.
"They are more accepting of who they are and I think the community is
more comfortable with this style of parade."
Pride Week committee member Jennifer Gregoire told parade
participants before the event started that such an event is necessary to let
others know that there are gays and lesbians living in the city.
"Days like this give us the opportunity to show the community we are
here, we have faces and we will not stop until days like this no longer
exist," she said, to loud cheers.
"We are here. We are proud. And we are not going anywhere."
Sudbury Regional Hospital CEO Vickie Kaminski, who has several gay
friends and also came out to a Pride Parade several years ago to show
support for them, said she expects to see Sudbury's and other cities' Pride
Parades continue for many more years.
"I think when we have to talk of tolerance, it means we still have
the problem," she said.
"I don't think we have to 'tolerate' someone. When people have to
come and demonstrate, it means we are not there yet."
Very divisive
Kaminski said the issue of same-sex marriage could turn out to be a
very divisive one across Canada.
"I think it's a long way from being settled," she said. "It's one of
those issues. The two sides - they are very diametrically opposed."
The lone Pride Parade protester, Robert Cram, 34, of Sudbury, said
that as a Christian, he felt he had to make a statement against the parade.
"I'm just demonstrating," he said. "I'm not going to interrupt their
festivities ... It's something I have to express some opposition to."
Cram said he is opposed to same-sex marriages.
"It's not something that should happen," he said. "It's going to be
a pretty big issue and the church is being strongly influenced by it."
You've got mail: MPs hear from their constituents about same-sex marriage
The Hill Times, August 4, 2003
69 Sparks St., Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5A5 Canada
(Fax: 613-232-9055) ( http://www.thehilltimes.ca )
You've got mail
By Paco Francoli, francoli@hilltimes.com
A number of Liberal MPs back in their ridings for the summer months
are feeling the pressure from having to deal with "hundreds" of letters over
the government's plans to allow gays and lesbians to marry legally.
"Everybody I've talked to is getting just hundreds of letters and
calls about it," admits Liberal MP Roger Gallaway, who said that his riding
office has been overwhelmed by constituents upset that the courts seem to be
in charge of the country's definition of marriage, not federal politicians.
"People are frustrated. It's fine to say that this is about
churches. But it's not about churches; it's about an attack on the system
of law making and public policy making in this country. We might as well
fold up Parliament and let the judges run things."
Mr. Gallaway (Sarnia-Lambton, Ont.) doesn't plan to vote for the bill
which is currently in draft form and being reviewed by the Supreme Court.
The government has made the issue a free-vote in the House.
He told The Hill Times that he sympathizes with the concerns
expressed by his constituents who don't understand why the courts are
directing the process.
"What we've seen instead is a patchwork of chaos in the law which has
been created by the courts without any regard to the right of people to be
heard. What they've done is used the Charter of rights as a battering ram
against Parliament.
"What is occurring is, from a Parliamentary perspective, bizarre.
There has been no debate in Parliament about this issue."
Liberal MP Peter Adams said that his riding office has also been
swamped over the controversial issue.
"It's the big issue of the summer. In terms of contacts, phone
calls, emails, it's in the hundreds in this riding," he said in an interview
last month, adding that the "clear majority" has serious concerns with this
legislative initiative which the Supreme Court has been asked to rule
whether it complies with the Charter of Rights and Freedom.
Mr. Adams (Peterborough, Ont.) says that he will vote for the bill.
He also said that he has had success in allaying some of the concerns raised
by his voters by stressing that the bill will protect the role of Churches
in deciding whether to grant gay marriages.
"I personally think that the Supreme Court is going to indicate that
this is appropriate in the same way that baptism and other sacraments are
the preserve of churches. That's what I'm trying to do. If I get to talk
to people on the phone or in person, they are often very reasonable about
that. Not always though."
Not all MPs are having a tough time defending the government's
position on gay marriage. Liberal MP Jacques Saada (Brossard-La-Prairie,
Que.) said that the issue has barely registered in his riding.
"I wasn't swarmed. I had 10 to 15 emails," he said, adding that
although he hasn't seen the draft bill he supports the idea in principle.
He also said that debate on the bill has just started and that it's
incumbent on all Liberal MPs to explain to their voters what the government
is trying to do.
"When you consider same-sex marriage in this bill, there is no
intention of forcing the issue on any religious group. This is not very
well known," he said.
Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's (Saint Maurice, Que.) decision to
change the definition of marriage happened only three years after the House
of Commons voted overwhelmingly to keep the traditional definition intact.
In 1999, over 100 Liberals voted against any changes.
The lead minister on the file, Justice Minister Martin Cauchon
(Outremont, Que.), has said that the government's hand was forced after a
string of court rulings in Quebec, British Columbia and Ontario making gay
marriage legal.
Canada would become only the third country in the world to legally
recognize gay marriage, after Belgium and the Netherlands. "Marriage, for
civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all
others," reads Canada's new definition.
But many MPs don't buy the argument. Mr. Gallaway maintains that the
government has given the courts too much freedom and that Parliament should
be taking the leading role, starting with a debate in the House of Commons.
Declared Mr. Gallaway: "People have been disenfranchised by the
courts. There is no semblance of representative democracy in the sense that
public policy is driven by Parliamentarians. What we've seen instead is a
patch work of chaos in the law which has been created by the courts without
any regard to the right of people to be heard. What they've done is used
the Charter of Rights as a battering ram against Parliament.
"What is clear now is that we are living in a judicial state. It's
equivalent to a theocracy in one sense in that instead of the clergy running
the country it's the judges."
Mr. Gallaway adds that Cabinet has "capitulated" to the Ontario Court
of Appeal decision that legalized same-sex marriage in that province last
June.
The Supreme Court reference has also left MPs on the House's Justice
Committee, who have been conducting a cross-country study on gay marriage,
wondering whether they still have a role to play in the debate.
The MPs proved just how divisive the issue at their last meeting
before the Parliamentary summer recess, held to advise the government on
whether or not to appeal the Ontario court decision. The committee
eventually passed a motion not to appeal, but only after chair Andy Scott
(Fredericton, N.B.) was forced to vote to break a deadlock.
Last month in an interview with The Hill Times, the committee's
vice-chair, Liberal John McKay (Scarborough East, Ont.), said that while he
opposes redefining marriage to include gay marriage, he recognizes that
there is an equity issue that the government can't ignore.
"We have arrived at a point where we have a Charter obligation to
recognize and to equalize relationships insofar as possible. Some of the
most avid traditional proponents of marriage want everyone treated equally,
but they don't want the word, the institution, the symbolism, the entire
tradition picked up by a non-qualified group and applied to themselves. I
think that's where the issue lies," he said.
Last week, the country's political leaders came under intense
pressure from powerful church leaders, particularly form the Catholic faith
which told all Cahotlics they have a moral duty to object to same-sex
marriage. The current Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien (Saint Maurice, Que.),
and his likely successor, Paul Martin (LaSalle-Émard, Que.), are Catholic,
but both support for the new definition.
"I am a practicing Catholic and I have responsibilities as a
legislator and those responsibilities must take in a wider perspective," Mr.
Martin told reporters last week.
A vote is expected this fall in the House of Commons on the divisive
issue.
69 Sparks St., Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5A5 Canada
(Fax: 613-232-9055) ( http://www.thehilltimes.ca )
You've got mail
By Paco Francoli, francoli@hilltimes.com
A number of Liberal MPs back in their ridings for the summer months
are feeling the pressure from having to deal with "hundreds" of letters over
the government's plans to allow gays and lesbians to marry legally.
"Everybody I've talked to is getting just hundreds of letters and
calls about it," admits Liberal MP Roger Gallaway, who said that his riding
office has been overwhelmed by constituents upset that the courts seem to be
in charge of the country's definition of marriage, not federal politicians.
"People are frustrated. It's fine to say that this is about
churches. But it's not about churches; it's about an attack on the system
of law making and public policy making in this country. We might as well
fold up Parliament and let the judges run things."
Mr. Gallaway (Sarnia-Lambton, Ont.) doesn't plan to vote for the bill
which is currently in draft form and being reviewed by the Supreme Court.
The government has made the issue a free-vote in the House.
He told The Hill Times that he sympathizes with the concerns
expressed by his constituents who don't understand why the courts are
directing the process.
"What we've seen instead is a patchwork of chaos in the law which has
been created by the courts without any regard to the right of people to be
heard. What they've done is used the Charter of rights as a battering ram
against Parliament.
"What is occurring is, from a Parliamentary perspective, bizarre.
There has been no debate in Parliament about this issue."
Liberal MP Peter Adams said that his riding office has also been
swamped over the controversial issue.
"It's the big issue of the summer. In terms of contacts, phone
calls, emails, it's in the hundreds in this riding," he said in an interview
last month, adding that the "clear majority" has serious concerns with this
legislative initiative which the Supreme Court has been asked to rule
whether it complies with the Charter of Rights and Freedom.
Mr. Adams (Peterborough, Ont.) says that he will vote for the bill.
He also said that he has had success in allaying some of the concerns raised
by his voters by stressing that the bill will protect the role of Churches
in deciding whether to grant gay marriages.
"I personally think that the Supreme Court is going to indicate that
this is appropriate in the same way that baptism and other sacraments are
the preserve of churches. That's what I'm trying to do. If I get to talk
to people on the phone or in person, they are often very reasonable about
that. Not always though."
Not all MPs are having a tough time defending the government's
position on gay marriage. Liberal MP Jacques Saada (Brossard-La-Prairie,
Que.) said that the issue has barely registered in his riding.
"I wasn't swarmed. I had 10 to 15 emails," he said, adding that
although he hasn't seen the draft bill he supports the idea in principle.
He also said that debate on the bill has just started and that it's
incumbent on all Liberal MPs to explain to their voters what the government
is trying to do.
"When you consider same-sex marriage in this bill, there is no
intention of forcing the issue on any religious group. This is not very
well known," he said.
Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's (Saint Maurice, Que.) decision to
change the definition of marriage happened only three years after the House
of Commons voted overwhelmingly to keep the traditional definition intact.
In 1999, over 100 Liberals voted against any changes.
The lead minister on the file, Justice Minister Martin Cauchon
(Outremont, Que.), has said that the government's hand was forced after a
string of court rulings in Quebec, British Columbia and Ontario making gay
marriage legal.
Canada would become only the third country in the world to legally
recognize gay marriage, after Belgium and the Netherlands. "Marriage, for
civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all
others," reads Canada's new definition.
But many MPs don't buy the argument. Mr. Gallaway maintains that the
government has given the courts too much freedom and that Parliament should
be taking the leading role, starting with a debate in the House of Commons.
Declared Mr. Gallaway: "People have been disenfranchised by the
courts. There is no semblance of representative democracy in the sense that
public policy is driven by Parliamentarians. What we've seen instead is a
patch work of chaos in the law which has been created by the courts without
any regard to the right of people to be heard. What they've done is used
the Charter of Rights as a battering ram against Parliament.
"What is clear now is that we are living in a judicial state. It's
equivalent to a theocracy in one sense in that instead of the clergy running
the country it's the judges."
Mr. Gallaway adds that Cabinet has "capitulated" to the Ontario Court
of Appeal decision that legalized same-sex marriage in that province last
June.
The Supreme Court reference has also left MPs on the House's Justice
Committee, who have been conducting a cross-country study on gay marriage,
wondering whether they still have a role to play in the debate.
The MPs proved just how divisive the issue at their last meeting
before the Parliamentary summer recess, held to advise the government on
whether or not to appeal the Ontario court decision. The committee
eventually passed a motion not to appeal, but only after chair Andy Scott
(Fredericton, N.B.) was forced to vote to break a deadlock.
Last month in an interview with The Hill Times, the committee's
vice-chair, Liberal John McKay (Scarborough East, Ont.), said that while he
opposes redefining marriage to include gay marriage, he recognizes that
there is an equity issue that the government can't ignore.
"We have arrived at a point where we have a Charter obligation to
recognize and to equalize relationships insofar as possible. Some of the
most avid traditional proponents of marriage want everyone treated equally,
but they don't want the word, the institution, the symbolism, the entire
tradition picked up by a non-qualified group and applied to themselves. I
think that's where the issue lies," he said.
Last week, the country's political leaders came under intense
pressure from powerful church leaders, particularly form the Catholic faith
which told all Cahotlics they have a moral duty to object to same-sex
marriage. The current Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien (Saint Maurice, Que.),
and his likely successor, Paul Martin (LaSalle-Émard, Que.), are Catholic,
but both support for the new definition.
"I am a practicing Catholic and I have responsibilities as a
legislator and those responsibilities must take in a wider perspective," Mr.
Martin told reporters last week.
A vote is expected this fall in the House of Commons on the divisive
issue.
RSS @ http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/rss/gay_blog.xml
Toronto Globe & Mail, August 7, 2003
444 Front St. W., Toronto, Ontario, M5V 2S9 Canada
(Fax: 416-585-5085) (E-Mail: letters@globeandmail.com )
( http://www.globeandmail.com )
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030806.ulibs0807/BNStory/N
ational/
Liberals planning revolt on same-sex issue
By Jane Taber
Ottawa - Some Liberal backbenchers are working on a plan to force
Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and his cabinet to back down on same-sex
marriage, at what is expected to be a bitter and emotional national caucus
meeting later this month.
"This [same-sex-marriage issue] is going to possess the caucus,"
Sarnia Liberal MP Roger Gallaway said yesterday.
Toronto Liberal MP Joe Volpe says he and his colleagues will be
"compelled to come together" at the three-day caucus meeting "because our
constituents are forcing us in that direction."
"All of us are going to have to do that [come together with a
strategy to confront the Prime Minister], all of us," he said.
The caucus meets Aug. 19 to 21 in North Bay.
However, backbenchers are not the only Liberals concerned with the
proposed legislation.
Solicitor-General Wayne Easter says he "personally" has trouble with
the new definition of marriage, adding that there is going to have to be
"considerable debate among cabinet and among Parliament [if the definition
of marriage is going to change]."
"There is a difference between heterosexual couples when they get
married; it's procreation," he said. "That can't happen with same-sex
couples."
However, Mr. Easter said that as a cabinet minister he respects
cabinet solidarity and if he lost his fight around the cabinet table he
would support the legislation that emerged.
Junior minister David Kilgour has also spoken out against same-sex
marriage, though he has not decided how he will vote in a free vote on the
bill.
Meanwhile, Mr. Gallaway says that at the coming caucus he wants to
force the Prime Minister and the cabinet to reverse their position on the
same-sex issue by either staying the Ontario court decision or withdrawing
and restructuring the reference made to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Earlier this summer, Justice Minister Martin Cauchon referred to the
top court draft legislation that redefined marriage to include same-sex
couples.
Since then, Liberal members of Parliament have been inundated with
phone calls, e-mails and letters from constituents, who are angry over the
government's handling of the issue.
One MP received about 450 letters and another says there are "boxes"
of mail from constituents that haven't been opened, sitting in the office.
Mr. Volpe, who has received more than 300 letters, phone calls and
e-mails on the issue, said he hasn't had time yet to co-ordinate a formal
strategy with his colleagues. But he figures it will happen soon.
"I suspect somebody will be ingenious enough to work out something
about what needs to be done," he said.
Both he and Mr. Gallaway have been talking to their caucus colleagues
over the past several weeks but only informally.
This issue, and the federal government's decision not to appeal the
Ontario Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, is deeply
dividing the Liberal caucus.
In fact, Montreal Liberal MP Nic Discepola, who supports the proposed
bill, doesn't understand what all the "kerfuffle" is about, setting up a
dynamic that will certainly spill over to the North Bay caucus.
Mr. Volpe says he plans to address the Prime Minister at the caucus,
demanding to know why he and his cabinet are allowing three Ontario appeal
court judges, rather than the elected legislators, to decide public policy.
Mr. Gallaway characterized the Ontario court decision in June that
legalized same-sex marriages as "a terrible attack on the democratic
principles in Ontario."
"Ontario members have been disenfranchised," he said. "When they are
disenfranchised the people they represent have been disenfranchised, and
they have been disenfranchised because the courts have made policy in law
and the cabinet cares not to defend the institution of Parliament."
Mr. Gallaway even predicts some Ontario Liberal MPs will lose their
seats in the next federal election as a result of the proposed legislation.
Both MPs are frustrated by the fact that the Prime Minister, and the
Court of Appeal, have ignored the 1999 motion of the House of Commons that
defined marriage as the "union of one man and one woman."
Mr. Chrétien and the majority of his cabinet supported the motion
that passed 216 to 55.
Mr. Gallaway said that Mr. Chrétien famously relied on a resolution
of the House from 1919, the Nickle Resolution, to block former Canadian
newspaper publisher Conrad Black from receiving a British peerage.
"So a resolution from [1919] was used by the Justice Department to
defend his actions but he will not in turn defend our actions of three years
ago," he said.
And the MPs are angry that the Prime Minister and cabinet made the
decision not to appeal the Ontario court decision after Parliament had risen
for the summer. There was no caucus consultation.
Mr. Gallaway says the Prime Minister's handling of this issue is
"absurd" and a "joke." He said the law has already been made and now MPs
are debating something that is already in force.
He said his colleagues are just starting now to realize that the
"path that has been laid out by the Prime Minister excludes them from any
role. They're just the Supremes and Diana Ross is out front."
444 Front St. W., Toronto, Ontario, M5V 2S9 Canada
(Fax: 416-585-5085) (E-Mail: letters@globeandmail.com )
( http://www.globeandmail.com )
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030806.ulibs0807/BNStory/N
ational/
Liberals planning revolt on same-sex issue
By Jane Taber
Ottawa - Some Liberal backbenchers are working on a plan to force
Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and his cabinet to back down on same-sex
marriage, at what is expected to be a bitter and emotional national caucus
meeting later this month.
"This [same-sex-marriage issue] is going to possess the caucus,"
Sarnia Liberal MP Roger Gallaway said yesterday.
Toronto Liberal MP Joe Volpe says he and his colleagues will be
"compelled to come together" at the three-day caucus meeting "because our
constituents are forcing us in that direction."
"All of us are going to have to do that [come together with a
strategy to confront the Prime Minister], all of us," he said.
The caucus meets Aug. 19 to 21 in North Bay.
However, backbenchers are not the only Liberals concerned with the
proposed legislation.
Solicitor-General Wayne Easter says he "personally" has trouble with
the new definition of marriage, adding that there is going to have to be
"considerable debate among cabinet and among Parliament [if the definition
of marriage is going to change]."
"There is a difference between heterosexual couples when they get
married; it's procreation," he said. "That can't happen with same-sex
couples."
However, Mr. Easter said that as a cabinet minister he respects
cabinet solidarity and if he lost his fight around the cabinet table he
would support the legislation that emerged.
Junior minister David Kilgour has also spoken out against same-sex
marriage, though he has not decided how he will vote in a free vote on the
bill.
Meanwhile, Mr. Gallaway says that at the coming caucus he wants to
force the Prime Minister and the cabinet to reverse their position on the
same-sex issue by either staying the Ontario court decision or withdrawing
and restructuring the reference made to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Earlier this summer, Justice Minister Martin Cauchon referred to the
top court draft legislation that redefined marriage to include same-sex
couples.
Since then, Liberal members of Parliament have been inundated with
phone calls, e-mails and letters from constituents, who are angry over the
government's handling of the issue.
One MP received about 450 letters and another says there are "boxes"
of mail from constituents that haven't been opened, sitting in the office.
Mr. Volpe, who has received more than 300 letters, phone calls and
e-mails on the issue, said he hasn't had time yet to co-ordinate a formal
strategy with his colleagues. But he figures it will happen soon.
"I suspect somebody will be ingenious enough to work out something
about what needs to be done," he said.
Both he and Mr. Gallaway have been talking to their caucus colleagues
over the past several weeks but only informally.
This issue, and the federal government's decision not to appeal the
Ontario Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, is deeply
dividing the Liberal caucus.
In fact, Montreal Liberal MP Nic Discepola, who supports the proposed
bill, doesn't understand what all the "kerfuffle" is about, setting up a
dynamic that will certainly spill over to the North Bay caucus.
Mr. Volpe says he plans to address the Prime Minister at the caucus,
demanding to know why he and his cabinet are allowing three Ontario appeal
court judges, rather than the elected legislators, to decide public policy.
Mr. Gallaway characterized the Ontario court decision in June that
legalized same-sex marriages as "a terrible attack on the democratic
principles in Ontario."
"Ontario members have been disenfranchised," he said. "When they are
disenfranchised the people they represent have been disenfranchised, and
they have been disenfranchised because the courts have made policy in law
and the cabinet cares not to defend the institution of Parliament."
Mr. Gallaway even predicts some Ontario Liberal MPs will lose their
seats in the next federal election as a result of the proposed legislation.
Both MPs are frustrated by the fact that the Prime Minister, and the
Court of Appeal, have ignored the 1999 motion of the House of Commons that
defined marriage as the "union of one man and one woman."
Mr. Chrétien and the majority of his cabinet supported the motion
that passed 216 to 55.
Mr. Gallaway said that Mr. Chrétien famously relied on a resolution
of the House from 1919, the Nickle Resolution, to block former Canadian
newspaper publisher Conrad Black from receiving a British peerage.
"So a resolution from [1919] was used by the Justice Department to
defend his actions but he will not in turn defend our actions of three years
ago," he said.
And the MPs are angry that the Prime Minister and cabinet made the
decision not to appeal the Ontario court decision after Parliament had risen
for the summer. There was no caucus consultation.
Mr. Gallaway says the Prime Minister's handling of this issue is
"absurd" and a "joke." He said the law has already been made and now MPs
are debating something that is already in force.
He said his colleagues are just starting now to realize that the
"path that has been laid out by the Prime Minister excludes them from any
role. They're just the Supremes and Diana Ross is out front."
'Honesty' comes out'
The Australian, 11th August, 2003
GPO Box 4162 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia
(E-Mail: mailto:ausletr@newscorp.com.au )
( http://www.theaustralian.com.au/ )
'Honesty' comes out'
'I can't believe this will make much difference to someone sitting in his
pew in Nigeria'
Openly gay US bishop Gene Robinson says he is neither Satan nor a saint,
writes Jasper Gerard.
Winston Churchill said the navy survived on "rum, sodomy and the
lash".
God's house has much in common with Admiralty House.
Cassocks, like bellbottoms, have long provided camouflage for
homosexuals.
What's changed is that a few in holy orders have, rather bravely,
dared come out.
Stiff old-worlders have reacted to this outbreak of openness with
fury.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was caught up recently in the
fracas over the appointment of Canon Jeffrey John, a homosexual, as Bishop
of Reading.
The cleric subsequently withdrew after Willliams failed to support
him.
In the US last week, Gene Robinson was confirmed, not merely a
bachelor, but a bishop. He is the first openly gay bishop in the Anglican
communion.
His grace's other half? One Mark Andrew, who must learn sharpish how
to cut the ribbon at openings of village fetes.
The "H" word, he says, is not homosexuality, but honesty.
"I can't find a conservative in the bunch that claims you in Britain
or we in America don't have privately gay bishops. So should the church
punish honesty now?"
But Robinson's Episcopal Church is part of the 70 million-strong
worldwide Anglican Church which could shatter under the weight of the first
communion wafer he proffers as Bishop of New Hampshire. This places Rowan
Williams, as head of the church, in his worst crisis.
But, according to Robinson, Williams and other worried church leaders
around the world should simply rise to the challenge. "I am sure this will
put further pressure on him and make it very difficult," he says.
"But I suspect such difficulties will come as no surprise.
He says, defiantly, that Britain has no power to block his promotion.
"No other primate has authority over the Episcopal Church; nor, I
might add, does the Archbishop."
In everything bar sexuality, Robinson, 56, is straight: short, neatly
trimmed greyish hair, little button eyes and a polite, cheery amiability.
But to fundamentalists in the US, who launched a witch-hunt last week
to scupper his ordination, and Africa, threatening to break free from the
colonial yoke of Lambeth Palace, disgusted by the West's heathen ways, he
has become the anti-Christ. "I'm demonised as Satan or taken to be some
saint, and the truth is I'm neither," Robinson says.
His real first name is Vicky. His father, a tobacco farmer, declared
it didn't matter if the baby had a girl's name as the birth was so
precarious he was unlikely to survive. Birth and death certificates were
prepared.
But even this paternal insensitivity could not prepare him for the
cheap jibes he endured last week, even from bishops.
One so-called Christian supposedly "proved" Robinson's connection to
a porno website; another claimed Robinson harassed him.
Having just been cleared by the inquiry, he enjoyed a decisive
election victory (bishops, like rat catchers and presidents, are elected in
the US).
But still the bitterness boils.
"The timing of these claims was curious to say the least," says
Robinson with studied understatement. He insists the website, for a group
helping the young troubled by their sexuality, was actually six clicks away
from anything pornographic; besides, when he broke with the group four years
ago, it didn't even have a website.
As for the parishioner he "harassed", Robinson simply put his hand on
his shoulder during counselling - the "victim" eventually admitted to this.
"Well, if that's sexual harassment..." Robinson trails off, still
amazed.
"I don't know why. Other bishops took it up and had it investigated.
The most superficial questioning would have shown the complaints were bogus.
It's McCarthyist."
With help from the church, a "worried" Robinson had guards at the
convention where he was voted a bishop in Minneapolis and extra security at
the house in rural New Hampshire he shares with Mark, his partner and lover
of 16 years.
He has received several thousand emails from around the world, "98
per cent positive", he claims.
He has also had to fend off accusations that he left his wife,
Isabella, for Mark. "I met my partner two months after my wife remarried,"
he corrects.
"My relationship with my wife continues to be wonderful," he smiles,
forgetting to add "ex". "I would say our relationship is a model for
divorced people to treat one another. I speak with her almost every week.
She called to wish me well and to say she hoped I would be the next
bishop."
So was it while he was married he realised he was homosexual?
"Yes, the last few years we were married my former wife and I dealt
with this and worked with a therapist. We came to this mutual decision that
the best way we could honour each other was to let each other go."
But surely you don't wake up one morning gay?
No, he admits, during adolescence 'Playboy' never did it for him, and
right back in 1972 before marrying, he says he told Isabella of his
confusion.
The marriage produced two daughters. How, I wonder, did they take
his gayness?
"My relationship with my children is simply wonderful. We had joint
custody. They have known Mark for the 16 years I've known him and they
absolutely adore him; they turn to him for advice and consider him their
other dad. Our younger daughter, Ella, is living with us this summer."
When his daughter Jamee married, Mark walked Robinson's ex-wife down
the aisle and the three" "parents" sat together in the front pew. Modern or
what?
The "gay lifestyle" has been used to attack Robinson.
This is as much a dig at the supposedly promiscuous lifestyle of gay
men as the sex of the people they are having sex with.
So does he believe his current love is "it"?
"It's very strong. The character of our marriage, not our marriage,
our relationship," he checks himself, "is that I have every reason to
believe this is the man I will grow old with, and either nurse at his
deathbed or he at mine."
He insists his agenda is to be "a good bishop, not a gay bishop" but
he will swing by London for a gay Christian conference later this year.
Does he not feel the weight of the Anglican Church on his shoulders?
"Very much. I pray about it every day."
But praying, it seems, for opponents to come around to his
enlightened view. When I suggest that his so-civilised divorce and gay
"marriage" will simply be beyond the ken of many Christians in Africa -
about the only place where Anglicanism is a growth industry - he says: "I
can't believe this will make much difference to someone sitting in his pew
in Nigeria. Going to church next week will seem pretty like going to church
last week." Perhaps, but their bishops might not agree.
And in a swipe at the priorities of his opponents (particularly,
perhaps, those African bishops) he says: "My goodness, we all have terrible
social problems, people who are lost, who are hungry. We have enough to do
in our own vineyards without casting aspersions on other provinces.
So while I want to be mindful of Anglicans around the world, I'm
really not willing to be completely bound by their criticisms."
Reactionaries blame declining church attendances on the "trendy
vicar" tendency, of which the gay bishop is the most extreme manifestation.
Is that fair? "Frankly, most young people I've talked to have
resolved the issue of homosexuality and think the church is hopelessly
irrelevant fighting about it. Are we winning anyone to Christ with these
battles? I think not."
What would God make of this row then? "I think it breaks God's
heart."
But that is as speculative as those haters who claim that God would
be horrified by gay bishops.
To the non-religious, it seems outrageous anyone should be
discriminated against for being gay. But as soon as gays call on the
goodness of God to defend them, they are lost in an argumentative wasteland.
Would a gay bishop be welcome in heaven? The problem is heaven is
like Atlantis; a construct to which we ascribe any qualities we admire.
A long time ago, Christians decided God didn't like homosexuality,
purely because they didn't like it.
Which is totally unreasonable; but that is the nature of religion.
. The Sunday Times
GPO Box 4162 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia
(E-Mail: mailto:ausletr@newscorp.com.au )
( http://www.theaustralian.com.au/ )
'Honesty' comes out'
'I can't believe this will make much difference to someone sitting in his
pew in Nigeria'
Openly gay US bishop Gene Robinson says he is neither Satan nor a saint,
writes Jasper Gerard.
Winston Churchill said the navy survived on "rum, sodomy and the
lash".
God's house has much in common with Admiralty House.
Cassocks, like bellbottoms, have long provided camouflage for
homosexuals.
What's changed is that a few in holy orders have, rather bravely,
dared come out.
Stiff old-worlders have reacted to this outbreak of openness with
fury.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was caught up recently in the
fracas over the appointment of Canon Jeffrey John, a homosexual, as Bishop
of Reading.
The cleric subsequently withdrew after Willliams failed to support
him.
In the US last week, Gene Robinson was confirmed, not merely a
bachelor, but a bishop. He is the first openly gay bishop in the Anglican
communion.
His grace's other half? One Mark Andrew, who must learn sharpish how
to cut the ribbon at openings of village fetes.
The "H" word, he says, is not homosexuality, but honesty.
"I can't find a conservative in the bunch that claims you in Britain
or we in America don't have privately gay bishops. So should the church
punish honesty now?"
But Robinson's Episcopal Church is part of the 70 million-strong
worldwide Anglican Church which could shatter under the weight of the first
communion wafer he proffers as Bishop of New Hampshire. This places Rowan
Williams, as head of the church, in his worst crisis.
But, according to Robinson, Williams and other worried church leaders
around the world should simply rise to the challenge. "I am sure this will
put further pressure on him and make it very difficult," he says.
"But I suspect such difficulties will come as no surprise.
He says, defiantly, that Britain has no power to block his promotion.
"No other primate has authority over the Episcopal Church; nor, I
might add, does the Archbishop."
In everything bar sexuality, Robinson, 56, is straight: short, neatly
trimmed greyish hair, little button eyes and a polite, cheery amiability.
But to fundamentalists in the US, who launched a witch-hunt last week
to scupper his ordination, and Africa, threatening to break free from the
colonial yoke of Lambeth Palace, disgusted by the West's heathen ways, he
has become the anti-Christ. "I'm demonised as Satan or taken to be some
saint, and the truth is I'm neither," Robinson says.
His real first name is Vicky. His father, a tobacco farmer, declared
it didn't matter if the baby had a girl's name as the birth was so
precarious he was unlikely to survive. Birth and death certificates were
prepared.
But even this paternal insensitivity could not prepare him for the
cheap jibes he endured last week, even from bishops.
One so-called Christian supposedly "proved" Robinson's connection to
a porno website; another claimed Robinson harassed him.
Having just been cleared by the inquiry, he enjoyed a decisive
election victory (bishops, like rat catchers and presidents, are elected in
the US).
But still the bitterness boils.
"The timing of these claims was curious to say the least," says
Robinson with studied understatement. He insists the website, for a group
helping the young troubled by their sexuality, was actually six clicks away
from anything pornographic; besides, when he broke with the group four years
ago, it didn't even have a website.
As for the parishioner he "harassed", Robinson simply put his hand on
his shoulder during counselling - the "victim" eventually admitted to this.
"Well, if that's sexual harassment..." Robinson trails off, still
amazed.
"I don't know why. Other bishops took it up and had it investigated.
The most superficial questioning would have shown the complaints were bogus.
It's McCarthyist."
With help from the church, a "worried" Robinson had guards at the
convention where he was voted a bishop in Minneapolis and extra security at
the house in rural New Hampshire he shares with Mark, his partner and lover
of 16 years.
He has received several thousand emails from around the world, "98
per cent positive", he claims.
He has also had to fend off accusations that he left his wife,
Isabella, for Mark. "I met my partner two months after my wife remarried,"
he corrects.
"My relationship with my wife continues to be wonderful," he smiles,
forgetting to add "ex". "I would say our relationship is a model for
divorced people to treat one another. I speak with her almost every week.
She called to wish me well and to say she hoped I would be the next
bishop."
So was it while he was married he realised he was homosexual?
"Yes, the last few years we were married my former wife and I dealt
with this and worked with a therapist. We came to this mutual decision that
the best way we could honour each other was to let each other go."
But surely you don't wake up one morning gay?
No, he admits, during adolescence 'Playboy' never did it for him, and
right back in 1972 before marrying, he says he told Isabella of his
confusion.
The marriage produced two daughters. How, I wonder, did they take
his gayness?
"My relationship with my children is simply wonderful. We had joint
custody. They have known Mark for the 16 years I've known him and they
absolutely adore him; they turn to him for advice and consider him their
other dad. Our younger daughter, Ella, is living with us this summer."
When his daughter Jamee married, Mark walked Robinson's ex-wife down
the aisle and the three" "parents" sat together in the front pew. Modern or
what?
The "gay lifestyle" has been used to attack Robinson.
This is as much a dig at the supposedly promiscuous lifestyle of gay
men as the sex of the people they are having sex with.
So does he believe his current love is "it"?
"It's very strong. The character of our marriage, not our marriage,
our relationship," he checks himself, "is that I have every reason to
believe this is the man I will grow old with, and either nurse at his
deathbed or he at mine."
He insists his agenda is to be "a good bishop, not a gay bishop" but
he will swing by London for a gay Christian conference later this year.
Does he not feel the weight of the Anglican Church on his shoulders?
"Very much. I pray about it every day."
But praying, it seems, for opponents to come around to his
enlightened view. When I suggest that his so-civilised divorce and gay
"marriage" will simply be beyond the ken of many Christians in Africa -
about the only place where Anglicanism is a growth industry - he says: "I
can't believe this will make much difference to someone sitting in his pew
in Nigeria. Going to church next week will seem pretty like going to church
last week." Perhaps, but their bishops might not agree.
And in a swipe at the priorities of his opponents (particularly,
perhaps, those African bishops) he says: "My goodness, we all have terrible
social problems, people who are lost, who are hungry. We have enough to do
in our own vineyards without casting aspersions on other provinces.
So while I want to be mindful of Anglicans around the world, I'm
really not willing to be completely bound by their criticisms."
Reactionaries blame declining church attendances on the "trendy
vicar" tendency, of which the gay bishop is the most extreme manifestation.
Is that fair? "Frankly, most young people I've talked to have
resolved the issue of homosexuality and think the church is hopelessly
irrelevant fighting about it. Are we winning anyone to Christ with these
battles? I think not."
What would God make of this row then? "I think it breaks God's
heart."
But that is as speculative as those haters who claim that God would
be horrified by gay bishops.
To the non-religious, it seems outrageous anyone should be
discriminated against for being gay. But as soon as gays call on the
goodness of God to defend them, they are lost in an argumentative wasteland.
Would a gay bishop be welcome in heaven? The problem is heaven is
like Atlantis; a construct to which we ascribe any qualities we admire.
A long time ago, Christians decided God didn't like homosexuality,
purely because they didn't like it.
Which is totally unreasonable; but that is the nature of religion.
. The Sunday Times
A week of intensity for Episcopalians, Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus to sing national anthem at Marlins game, piscopal churches take rift in stride
1. SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE A week of intensity for Episcopalians: Even in
liberal Bay Area, emotional conversation about gay bishop
2. GREAT FALLS TRIBUNE (Montana) Local Episcopalians willing to accept gay
bishop
3. MIAMI HERALD Another landmark: Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus to sing national anthem at Marlins game
4. PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER Episcopal churches take rift in stride: Some
local congregants say controversy over a gay bishop will not change things.
But a defrocked rector hopes it will.
San Francisco Chronicle, August 11, 2003
901 Mission St., San Francisco, CA, 94103
(Fax: 415-896-1107 ) (E-Mail: letters@sfchronicle.com )
( http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle )
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/11/BA304153.DTL
A week of intensity for Episcopalians
Even in liberal Bay Area, emotional conversation about gay bishop
Demian Bulwa, Chronicle Staff Writer
After a week of intense soul-searching for Episcopalians over the
approval of the first openly gay bishop, the Rev. Frances Tornquist of San
Francisco's Grace Cathedral did something that might have been impossible in
most places outside this liberal city.
She dedicated her Sunday sermon to lauding the move.
Comparing the polarizing debate over the Rev. Gene Robinson, of the
New Hamshire diocese, to her journey as a female priest, Tornquist told more
than 600 people at the service, "What has been done this week is to open the
doors of inclusion ever wider, to affirm yet again and ever more publicly a
place at the table where all are fed."
Her words reflected the liberalism of the Episcopal clergy and
congregation in San Francisco - where officials have long ordained gays and
lesbians - as well as in many other Bay Area cities. The sermon also capped
a week of dinner-table and church-group discussions around the Bay Area
about homosexuality in the church.
"I don't mind (gay) people coming to church," said San Francisco's
Gayle Carston, who listened to Tornquist's sermon and thought it
crystallized her disagreement with Robinson's confirmation. "But I feel
that if someone gets up on the pulpit and preaches to me, they shouldn't
have an alternative lifestyle. "
Across the country, Robinson returned to his home church, St. Paul's
Church in Concord, N.H., on Sunday, to hugs and handshakes. The 56-year-old
divorced father of two, who has lived with his partner for more than 13
years, had been at the Minneapolis convention, where he was confirmed on
Tuesday.
That decision has so heightened tensions in the church that a
conservative group has threatened a schism, and the archbishop of Canterbury
has called for leaders of the 77 million-member worldwide Anglican Communion
to meet, Oct. 15- 16 in London.
There are also disagreements among loved ones, including at the
Carston household. Gayle Carston's husband, Arnold, said, "As long as
someone lives and acts like a Christian, they have a right to be part of the
church, whether they are an altar boy or a bishop." Looking at his wife, he
said, "The neat thing about the Episcopal Church is we can agree to
disagree."
To be sure, not all Bay Area Episcopalians agree with Tornquist -
although the emotional pitch here doesn't seem to match that of other places
in the country.
At services in San Francisco and Castro Valley on Sunday, some said
homosexuality is immoral and flouts the church doctrine they were brought up
with. Others, though, said they saw the move as a step toward full equality
for gays and lesbians, equating it to past controversies over civil rights
and the 1979 updating of the prayer book.
"One side is right, and one side is wrong," said Patrick Taylor, 55,
of Santa Rosa, while waiting for the San Francisco service to begin. "This
is 2003. Gay people are just people."
Robert Csendes, 46, of Morgan Hill, who also attended the San
Francisco service with his wife, Carol, pumped his fist when he was asked
about Rev. Robinson. "It's a wonderful step, and I sincerely hope it pulls
on other religions to do the same." He added, "I have a lot of sympathy for
those who didn't understand. They think of being gay as an illness. It's
no more an illness than having green eyes."
Many Sunday churchgoers seemed to fall in the middle, describing
their philosophy as "live and let live." They said that inclusion is vital
to the church and that a person's sexual preference is secondary to his or
her faith.
"We have a gay couple here - that's their life, and if they want to
(have their relationship blessed in church), and if a priest wants to do it,
that's God's will," said Madeline Roy, 78, who attended an early-morning
service at Holy Cross Episcopal Church in Castro Valley. "They're a couple
of neat people.
I think a lot of them."
At Holy Cross, the Rev. Mark Spaulding did not directly comment on
the debate during his sermon, but outside the church he said, "Nobody wants
a schism. We want everyone at the table. We want the liberals and the
conservatives."
But a member of his congregation, Marilyn Winkler of San Leandro,
said Rev. Robinson's approval as bishop was premature in the church.
"I think it's nice to be able to look up to our church leaders as
fine people," she said. "That's difficult for me" if they are gay.
Rev. Tornquist, who said she had thought about and prayed on her
sermon all week, told the assembly that because Grace Cathedral had long
been blessed by "the gifts of gay and lesbian clergy and congregation, it is
easy for us to forget the pain and suffering endured by many in our society
whose churches have not been affirming. We therefore have a unique
opportunity to indeed be a community of love and compassion for all people."
She continued, "Yet, even here at Grace Cathedral we are not of one
mind on this or any other issue. Certainly, there are some who will be
greatly grieved and concerned. . . . Their pain is real and their concerns
honest. But because we believe that what unites us, this table, is stronger
than anything that can divide us, I pray that we can continue to be persons
of goodwill despite our varying opinions."
. The Associated Press contributed to this report. E-mail Demian
Bulwa at dbulwa@sfchronicle.com.
Great Falls Tribune, August 11, 2003
P. O. Box 5468, Great Falls, MT, 59403
(Fax: 406-791-1431 ) ( http://www.greatfallstribune.com )
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/news/stories/20030811/localnews/40818.html
Local Episcopalians willing to accept gay bishop
By Paula Wilmot and Kim Skornogoski, Tribune Staff Writers
While Episcopalians worldwide threaten to break with the American
church over the confirmation of the first openly gay bishop, Great Falls'
lone Episcopal priest says she isn't expecting a great schism in the local
church.
The Rev. Sue Eades, priest at St. Francis Episcopal Church,
characterizes the Episcopal Church as very inclusive, and she says people
are hopeful that the confirmation of the Rev. V. Gene Robinson as New
Hampshire's bishop will open up a new group of people to acceptance.
"Jesus said to love one another as He has loved us," Eades said in an
interview Saturday. "That doesn't mean picking and choosing people who are
easy to love." Homeless people are as worthy of love as the family in the
big house on the hill, she continued.
One member has resigned from St. Francis in the wake of the
controversy over the confirmation of Robinson. Eades declined to identify
the person. "I am saddened that anyone would choose to separate from our
church because of this," she said.
Conversations with other members of the St. Francis congregation have
been mixed, she added. After services Sunday, a group of 20 or so church
members gathered for a picnic and to discuss the new Bishop.
"I have a hard time believing that God or Jesus would turn their
backs on anyone," said Teresa Redding, of Stockett. "I think (Robinson)
will be able to reach a whole lot of people who haven't been reached yet."
Many thought the decision reflects society's changing views about
what are acceptable lifestyles.
Debbie Marshall, 47, sees the evolution in her own family.
"As Christians we need to accept people for who they are, skeletons
and all," she said. "What was normal yesterday is not normal today."
While her husband Bill questions the church having an openly gay
bishop, their 15-year-old daughter Katie is "all for it."
"I think it's great," Katie Marshall said. However, she suggested
that he should minister in a state that acknowledges gay marriages so he
wouldn't live with his partner out of wedlock.
Many others at Sunday's picnic were concerned that Robinson is exempt
from the church's restrictions that bishops and priests can not marry and
can not live with someone outside of marriage.
"What makes me angry is that he's living with someone, it's not that
he's gay," said Brent Eades, the 28-year-old son of Rev. Eades. "The same
standards should apply to everyone.
"The positive side of this, is that we will get more people coming to
the Episcopalian Church because we are accepting."
Brent's brother Troy Eades, 32, who was visiting from Lewistown,
admitted he was homophobic, but said that sexual preference shouldn't be a
job qualification.
"I think they should let him do his job and judge him on that, not on
what he does in the bedroom," Troy Eades said.
Perhaps the most vocal, Helen Wardstarr, who has been a church member
67 of her 72 years, challenged the decision and Robinson's declaration of
sexual preference.
But, it wasn't enough to make her leave the church.
"I'm not going to leave, honey, I like a good fight," she said with a
laugh.
Rev. Eades listened to the discussion Sunday, stepped in to calm the
discussion on occasion.
"I believe that God speaks through God's people and that this
decision was made with much thought and talk," she said.
Most of the concerns of her congregation were reflected in the group
gathered Sunday. Eades believed that 90 percent of the congregation would
celebrate the church's inclusive stance.
"But living in this world, we have to live with change," she added,
"and change is painful."
Eades said she was speaking for herself and not the Diocese of
Montana, which also has a new bishop.
Church member Jim Conroy pointed out Saturday that the Episcopal
Church led the way for lady priests, he added. "And each diocese has the
prerogative to select its own bishop."
The selection process has checks and balances, too, according to
Eades. "Though this wasn't an easy confirmation, Robinson's selection was
upheld again and again," she said.
"I've heard people say 'hooray for the Episcopalians to be courageous
in meeting this head-on.' Still, some may want to picket our church. I
don't know," she added.
Eades is anticipating an increase in attendance on coming Sundays.
Some people may be curious; some may feel even more welcome; some may come
to be a part of what's happening here, she said.
"It's time for negative publicity to end," Eades said. "It's time to
be unified."
Miami Herald, August 11, 2003
1 Herald Plaza, Miami, FL, 33132
(Fax: 305-527-8955 or 305-376-8950 ) (E-Mail: HeraldEd@herald.com )
( http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/ )
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/entertainment/6505037.htm
Another landmark: Gay chorus to sing national anthem at game
By Steve Rothaus, srothaus@herald.com
A gay bishop in New Hampshire, gay marriage in Toronto and five gay
men atop the TV ratings on Bravo. Tuesday night, 50 gay men from throughout
South Florida will make their own bit of history at Pro Player Stadium.
"We are going to be singing the national anthem at the Marlins game.
It's a first for our organization and a first for the Marlins," said Joel
Johnson, 41, president of the Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus. "This is a
groundbreaking event."
The choral performance is part of the Florida Marlins' inaugural AIDS
Awareness Night benefit, which begins 7:05 p.m. Tuesday.
One of several gay-oriented singing groups in Miami-Dade and Broward
counties, the Fort Lauderdale chorus has been rehearsing for weeks with a
special, all-male arrangement of The Star-Spangled Banner, group spokesman
Chip Alfred said.
"It's an opportunity to really make a splash, being the first gay
performing-arts association in South Florida," said Alfred, the assistant
promotion manager at WPBF-TV in West Palm Beach. Gary Keating, now an
adjunct music professor at Barry University, founded the chorus in February
1986.
Since then, the group has gone through several incarnations, most
recently calling itself the Gay Men's Chorus of South Florida. With so many
gay choral groups now throughout South Florida, the group has renamed itself
the Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus ( www.gmcsf.net).
"We're primarily a Broward County organization," said Alfred, 49.
"We do best where we live. We're trying to max out our efforts." The group
regularly performs concerts throughout Fort Lauderdale and Wilton Manors.
The Marlins are enthusiastic about Tuesday's fundraiser, which
benefits South Florida's two largest AIDS service agencies, AIDS Project
Florida in Broward and Care Resource in Miami-Dade.
"It's an area of concern not just for South Florida, but worldwide,"
said Sean Flynn, the Marlins' vice president of marketing. "It's an issue
that needs exposure. We can spread awareness about AIDS. If we can help
raise some funds for groups we think are worthy, we'll do everything we
can."
The team donated 1,000 game tickets to the AIDS agencies, which are
selling them for $25 apiece. The groups get to keep 100 percent of the
proceeds, according to Norm Kent, executive director of AIDS Project
Florida.
Kent (a well-known Broward lawyer, radio talk host and publisher of
the Express Gay News) is seeking to launch a nonprofit group called Athletes
Against AIDS, "to form a national network of prominent athletes, starting
with ones in South Florida, to heighten AIDS awareness in professional
sports."
"Many of the baseball players have friends and relatives in Latin
America who are faced with incredible surges in HIV rates," Kent said. "The
paucity of services offered to those in the Caribbean with AIDS is glaring."
Kent, 53, also gives some sobering statistics about AIDS in Florida:
. As of last year, the state reported 90,000 AIDS cases.
. Florida ranks second behind New York in pediatric AIDS cases. So
far, 1,458 babies and children have been treated here.
. Black children comprise 81 percent of Florida's pediatric AIDS
cases.
Still, the health crisis continues to profoundly affect the lives of
gay men worldwide, which is why the Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus will be
singing at the fundraiser.
Alfred and the other chorus members are anxiously awaiting Tuesday
night. "It will be a very emotional moment: A major-league baseball
stadium, performing before thousands of the mainstream population. This is
a big deal."
Philadelphia Inquirer, August 11, 2003
PO Box 8263, Philadelphia, PA, 19101
(Fax: 215-854-4483 ) (E-Mail: Inquirer.opinion@phillynews.com )
( http://www.philly.com )
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/6505582.htm
Episcopal churches take rift in stride
Some local congregants say controversy over a gay bishop will not change
things. But a defrocked rector hopes it will.
By Patrick Kerkstra, Matthew P. Blanchard and Dawn Fallik, Inquirer Staff
Writers
Considering all the talk of schism and crisis within the Episcopal
Church, you'd think a devout parishioner such as Catherine Zeidler would
have a strong opinion on the raging debate over openly gay clergy.
Not so.
"What controversy?" she asked yesterday after a Mass at St. Mark's in
Center City. "Oh, the gay bishop, right."
Last week, for the first time, Episcopal Church USA narrowly
confirmed the appointment of an openly gay bishop, the Rev. V. Gene Robinson
of New Hampshire. The vote roiled the 77-million-member Anglican Communion,
widened the growing gap between the church's liberal and conservative wings,
and led the archbishop of Canterbury to call for an emergency October
meeting of Anglican leaders.
Yet for all the institutional turmoil, some parishioners and church
leaders at several moderate-to-liberal Philadelphia churches yesterday were
generally sanguine.
And even the prominent rector of a conservative Anglican church said
yesterday that his parishioners felt a "sense of release" after the
decision, convinced that it meant a final split with the U.S. Episcopal
Church was near.
St. Mark's, at 16th and Locust Streets, is one of the oldest
Episcopal churches in the city. With its elaborate stonework, stained
glass, wooden crucifix and High Mass, it is in many respects a highly
traditional church.
But the parishioners are a diverse group, and yesterday they stressed
acceptance and openness while keeping ideological overtones to a minimum.
"These things are sublimely unimportant," said 50-year parishioner
Bob Ennis. Then, quoting early 20th-century novelist Dorothy L. Sayers,
Ennis said: "'As I grow older and older, and totter toward the tomb, I find
that I care less and less, Who goes to bed with whom.' "
At the Church of the Crucifixion on Eighth and Bainbridge Streets,
old-timers dismissed the debate with waves and chuckles.
"It was like this in 1976 when they started ordaining women," said
organist Robert Becker, 79. "After all the emotions settled down, everyone
closed ranks again and said, 'We are one church.'"
Like St. Mark's, the Church of the Crucifixion has had to be flexible
and focused on faith to survive 156 years in a changing South Philadelphia
neighborhood.
"What does this have to do with our prayers?" asked Mabel Ballard,
78, of South Philadelphia.
The Rev. Joseph Wildsmith, who was visiting the Church of the
Crucifixion, gave a straightforward sermon on "Christ's acceptance of those
who murmured against him," with only one hint of the controversy that has
conservative Episcopalians contemplating a divorce from the U.S. church.
"I did do a prayer of unity, but I trust the church to find its way,"
Wildsmith said. "The Episcopal church held up through everything before.
It'll hold up over this."
But it won't "hold up" if the Rev. David L. Moyer can help it. The
rector of the conservative Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont, Moyer
considers reconciliation not just impossible, but undesirable as well.
"We're still in the Episcopal Church technically, but our people
believe it's been dying for years. It's kind of given up the cross," said
Moyer, who was defrocked by local Episcopal Bishop Charles Bennison last
year. Moyer is now under the oversight of the more conservative prelate of
the Province of Central Africa.
Moyer said "pirates" had taken over the U.S. Episcopal Church. "They
have taken the Episcopal Church out of the Anglican community," Moyer said.
"They're the schismatics."
Parishioners and clergy at the Church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields in
Chestnut Hill were equally emphatic in their views, but they supported the
church's increasing acceptance of gay clergy.
John Kane, 24, a preschool teacher from Warrington visiting the
church for the first time, said he thought that it was a "very bold move,
but a good move." He said, "I think it's great for the church to really
expand itself in the acceptance of people."
Lifelong parishioner Ginny Smith, 80, said she was "utterly thrilled"
at the "long overdue" appointment of an openly gay bishop, even though she
knew it would be difficult for many Episcopalians to accept.
But the "raging bonfire" his confirmation has created within the
church will be worth the torment in the long run, the Rev. Sharline Fulton
said in her sermon yesterday.
"The church is articulating a new understanding of who God is and the
refore who we are as derivations of God," Fulton said. "We don't dunk
people under water anymore to see if they're witches. We're finally getting
it."
liberal Bay Area, emotional conversation about gay bishop
2. GREAT FALLS TRIBUNE (Montana) Local Episcopalians willing to accept gay
bishop
3. MIAMI HERALD Another landmark: Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus to sing national anthem at Marlins game
4. PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER Episcopal churches take rift in stride: Some
local congregants say controversy over a gay bishop will not change things.
But a defrocked rector hopes it will.
San Francisco Chronicle, August 11, 2003
901 Mission St., San Francisco, CA, 94103
(Fax: 415-896-1107 ) (E-Mail: letters@sfchronicle.com )
( http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle )
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/11/BA304153.DTL
A week of intensity for Episcopalians
Even in liberal Bay Area, emotional conversation about gay bishop
Demian Bulwa, Chronicle Staff Writer
After a week of intense soul-searching for Episcopalians over the
approval of the first openly gay bishop, the Rev. Frances Tornquist of San
Francisco's Grace Cathedral did something that might have been impossible in
most places outside this liberal city.
She dedicated her Sunday sermon to lauding the move.
Comparing the polarizing debate over the Rev. Gene Robinson, of the
New Hamshire diocese, to her journey as a female priest, Tornquist told more
than 600 people at the service, "What has been done this week is to open the
doors of inclusion ever wider, to affirm yet again and ever more publicly a
place at the table where all are fed."
Her words reflected the liberalism of the Episcopal clergy and
congregation in San Francisco - where officials have long ordained gays and
lesbians - as well as in many other Bay Area cities. The sermon also capped
a week of dinner-table and church-group discussions around the Bay Area
about homosexuality in the church.
"I don't mind (gay) people coming to church," said San Francisco's
Gayle Carston, who listened to Tornquist's sermon and thought it
crystallized her disagreement with Robinson's confirmation. "But I feel
that if someone gets up on the pulpit and preaches to me, they shouldn't
have an alternative lifestyle. "
Across the country, Robinson returned to his home church, St. Paul's
Church in Concord, N.H., on Sunday, to hugs and handshakes. The 56-year-old
divorced father of two, who has lived with his partner for more than 13
years, had been at the Minneapolis convention, where he was confirmed on
Tuesday.
That decision has so heightened tensions in the church that a
conservative group has threatened a schism, and the archbishop of Canterbury
has called for leaders of the 77 million-member worldwide Anglican Communion
to meet, Oct. 15- 16 in London.
There are also disagreements among loved ones, including at the
Carston household. Gayle Carston's husband, Arnold, said, "As long as
someone lives and acts like a Christian, they have a right to be part of the
church, whether they are an altar boy or a bishop." Looking at his wife, he
said, "The neat thing about the Episcopal Church is we can agree to
disagree."
To be sure, not all Bay Area Episcopalians agree with Tornquist -
although the emotional pitch here doesn't seem to match that of other places
in the country.
At services in San Francisco and Castro Valley on Sunday, some said
homosexuality is immoral and flouts the church doctrine they were brought up
with. Others, though, said they saw the move as a step toward full equality
for gays and lesbians, equating it to past controversies over civil rights
and the 1979 updating of the prayer book.
"One side is right, and one side is wrong," said Patrick Taylor, 55,
of Santa Rosa, while waiting for the San Francisco service to begin. "This
is 2003. Gay people are just people."
Robert Csendes, 46, of Morgan Hill, who also attended the San
Francisco service with his wife, Carol, pumped his fist when he was asked
about Rev. Robinson. "It's a wonderful step, and I sincerely hope it pulls
on other religions to do the same." He added, "I have a lot of sympathy for
those who didn't understand. They think of being gay as an illness. It's
no more an illness than having green eyes."
Many Sunday churchgoers seemed to fall in the middle, describing
their philosophy as "live and let live." They said that inclusion is vital
to the church and that a person's sexual preference is secondary to his or
her faith.
"We have a gay couple here - that's their life, and if they want to
(have their relationship blessed in church), and if a priest wants to do it,
that's God's will," said Madeline Roy, 78, who attended an early-morning
service at Holy Cross Episcopal Church in Castro Valley. "They're a couple
of neat people.
I think a lot of them."
At Holy Cross, the Rev. Mark Spaulding did not directly comment on
the debate during his sermon, but outside the church he said, "Nobody wants
a schism. We want everyone at the table. We want the liberals and the
conservatives."
But a member of his congregation, Marilyn Winkler of San Leandro,
said Rev. Robinson's approval as bishop was premature in the church.
"I think it's nice to be able to look up to our church leaders as
fine people," she said. "That's difficult for me" if they are gay.
Rev. Tornquist, who said she had thought about and prayed on her
sermon all week, told the assembly that because Grace Cathedral had long
been blessed by "the gifts of gay and lesbian clergy and congregation, it is
easy for us to forget the pain and suffering endured by many in our society
whose churches have not been affirming. We therefore have a unique
opportunity to indeed be a community of love and compassion for all people."
She continued, "Yet, even here at Grace Cathedral we are not of one
mind on this or any other issue. Certainly, there are some who will be
greatly grieved and concerned. . . . Their pain is real and their concerns
honest. But because we believe that what unites us, this table, is stronger
than anything that can divide us, I pray that we can continue to be persons
of goodwill despite our varying opinions."
. The Associated Press contributed to this report. E-mail Demian
Bulwa at dbulwa@sfchronicle.com.
Great Falls Tribune, August 11, 2003
P. O. Box 5468, Great Falls, MT, 59403
(Fax: 406-791-1431 ) ( http://www.greatfallstribune.com )
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/news/stories/20030811/localnews/40818.html
Local Episcopalians willing to accept gay bishop
By Paula Wilmot and Kim Skornogoski, Tribune Staff Writers
While Episcopalians worldwide threaten to break with the American
church over the confirmation of the first openly gay bishop, Great Falls'
lone Episcopal priest says she isn't expecting a great schism in the local
church.
The Rev. Sue Eades, priest at St. Francis Episcopal Church,
characterizes the Episcopal Church as very inclusive, and she says people
are hopeful that the confirmation of the Rev. V. Gene Robinson as New
Hampshire's bishop will open up a new group of people to acceptance.
"Jesus said to love one another as He has loved us," Eades said in an
interview Saturday. "That doesn't mean picking and choosing people who are
easy to love." Homeless people are as worthy of love as the family in the
big house on the hill, she continued.
One member has resigned from St. Francis in the wake of the
controversy over the confirmation of Robinson. Eades declined to identify
the person. "I am saddened that anyone would choose to separate from our
church because of this," she said.
Conversations with other members of the St. Francis congregation have
been mixed, she added. After services Sunday, a group of 20 or so church
members gathered for a picnic and to discuss the new Bishop.
"I have a hard time believing that God or Jesus would turn their
backs on anyone," said Teresa Redding, of Stockett. "I think (Robinson)
will be able to reach a whole lot of people who haven't been reached yet."
Many thought the decision reflects society's changing views about
what are acceptable lifestyles.
Debbie Marshall, 47, sees the evolution in her own family.
"As Christians we need to accept people for who they are, skeletons
and all," she said. "What was normal yesterday is not normal today."
While her husband Bill questions the church having an openly gay
bishop, their 15-year-old daughter Katie is "all for it."
"I think it's great," Katie Marshall said. However, she suggested
that he should minister in a state that acknowledges gay marriages so he
wouldn't live with his partner out of wedlock.
Many others at Sunday's picnic were concerned that Robinson is exempt
from the church's restrictions that bishops and priests can not marry and
can not live with someone outside of marriage.
"What makes me angry is that he's living with someone, it's not that
he's gay," said Brent Eades, the 28-year-old son of Rev. Eades. "The same
standards should apply to everyone.
"The positive side of this, is that we will get more people coming to
the Episcopalian Church because we are accepting."
Brent's brother Troy Eades, 32, who was visiting from Lewistown,
admitted he was homophobic, but said that sexual preference shouldn't be a
job qualification.
"I think they should let him do his job and judge him on that, not on
what he does in the bedroom," Troy Eades said.
Perhaps the most vocal, Helen Wardstarr, who has been a church member
67 of her 72 years, challenged the decision and Robinson's declaration of
sexual preference.
But, it wasn't enough to make her leave the church.
"I'm not going to leave, honey, I like a good fight," she said with a
laugh.
Rev. Eades listened to the discussion Sunday, stepped in to calm the
discussion on occasion.
"I believe that God speaks through God's people and that this
decision was made with much thought and talk," she said.
Most of the concerns of her congregation were reflected in the group
gathered Sunday. Eades believed that 90 percent of the congregation would
celebrate the church's inclusive stance.
"But living in this world, we have to live with change," she added,
"and change is painful."
Eades said she was speaking for herself and not the Diocese of
Montana, which also has a new bishop.
Church member Jim Conroy pointed out Saturday that the Episcopal
Church led the way for lady priests, he added. "And each diocese has the
prerogative to select its own bishop."
The selection process has checks and balances, too, according to
Eades. "Though this wasn't an easy confirmation, Robinson's selection was
upheld again and again," she said.
"I've heard people say 'hooray for the Episcopalians to be courageous
in meeting this head-on.' Still, some may want to picket our church. I
don't know," she added.
Eades is anticipating an increase in attendance on coming Sundays.
Some people may be curious; some may feel even more welcome; some may come
to be a part of what's happening here, she said.
"It's time for negative publicity to end," Eades said. "It's time to
be unified."
Miami Herald, August 11, 2003
1 Herald Plaza, Miami, FL, 33132
(Fax: 305-527-8955 or 305-376-8950 ) (E-Mail: HeraldEd@herald.com )
( http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/ )
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/entertainment/6505037.htm
Another landmark: Gay chorus to sing national anthem at game
By Steve Rothaus, srothaus@herald.com
A gay bishop in New Hampshire, gay marriage in Toronto and five gay
men atop the TV ratings on Bravo. Tuesday night, 50 gay men from throughout
South Florida will make their own bit of history at Pro Player Stadium.
"We are going to be singing the national anthem at the Marlins game.
It's a first for our organization and a first for the Marlins," said Joel
Johnson, 41, president of the Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus. "This is a
groundbreaking event."
The choral performance is part of the Florida Marlins' inaugural AIDS
Awareness Night benefit, which begins 7:05 p.m. Tuesday.
One of several gay-oriented singing groups in Miami-Dade and Broward
counties, the Fort Lauderdale chorus has been rehearsing for weeks with a
special, all-male arrangement of The Star-Spangled Banner, group spokesman
Chip Alfred said.
"It's an opportunity to really make a splash, being the first gay
performing-arts association in South Florida," said Alfred, the assistant
promotion manager at WPBF-TV in West Palm Beach. Gary Keating, now an
adjunct music professor at Barry University, founded the chorus in February
1986.
Since then, the group has gone through several incarnations, most
recently calling itself the Gay Men's Chorus of South Florida. With so many
gay choral groups now throughout South Florida, the group has renamed itself
the Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus ( www.gmcsf.net).
"We're primarily a Broward County organization," said Alfred, 49.
"We do best where we live. We're trying to max out our efforts." The group
regularly performs concerts throughout Fort Lauderdale and Wilton Manors.
The Marlins are enthusiastic about Tuesday's fundraiser, which
benefits South Florida's two largest AIDS service agencies, AIDS Project
Florida in Broward and Care Resource in Miami-Dade.
"It's an area of concern not just for South Florida, but worldwide,"
said Sean Flynn, the Marlins' vice president of marketing. "It's an issue
that needs exposure. We can spread awareness about AIDS. If we can help
raise some funds for groups we think are worthy, we'll do everything we
can."
The team donated 1,000 game tickets to the AIDS agencies, which are
selling them for $25 apiece. The groups get to keep 100 percent of the
proceeds, according to Norm Kent, executive director of AIDS Project
Florida.
Kent (a well-known Broward lawyer, radio talk host and publisher of
the Express Gay News) is seeking to launch a nonprofit group called Athletes
Against AIDS, "to form a national network of prominent athletes, starting
with ones in South Florida, to heighten AIDS awareness in professional
sports."
"Many of the baseball players have friends and relatives in Latin
America who are faced with incredible surges in HIV rates," Kent said. "The
paucity of services offered to those in the Caribbean with AIDS is glaring."
Kent, 53, also gives some sobering statistics about AIDS in Florida:
. As of last year, the state reported 90,000 AIDS cases.
. Florida ranks second behind New York in pediatric AIDS cases. So
far, 1,458 babies and children have been treated here.
. Black children comprise 81 percent of Florida's pediatric AIDS
cases.
Still, the health crisis continues to profoundly affect the lives of
gay men worldwide, which is why the Fort Lauderdale Gay Men's Chorus will be
singing at the fundraiser.
Alfred and the other chorus members are anxiously awaiting Tuesday
night. "It will be a very emotional moment: A major-league baseball
stadium, performing before thousands of the mainstream population. This is
a big deal."
Philadelphia Inquirer, August 11, 2003
PO Box 8263, Philadelphia, PA, 19101
(Fax: 215-854-4483 ) (E-Mail: Inquirer.opinion@phillynews.com )
( http://www.philly.com )
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/6505582.htm
Episcopal churches take rift in stride
Some local congregants say controversy over a gay bishop will not change
things. But a defrocked rector hopes it will.
By Patrick Kerkstra, Matthew P. Blanchard and Dawn Fallik, Inquirer Staff
Writers
Considering all the talk of schism and crisis within the Episcopal
Church, you'd think a devout parishioner such as Catherine Zeidler would
have a strong opinion on the raging debate over openly gay clergy.
Not so.
"What controversy?" she asked yesterday after a Mass at St. Mark's in
Center City. "Oh, the gay bishop, right."
Last week, for the first time, Episcopal Church USA narrowly
confirmed the appointment of an openly gay bishop, the Rev. V. Gene Robinson
of New Hampshire. The vote roiled the 77-million-member Anglican Communion,
widened the growing gap between the church's liberal and conservative wings,
and led the archbishop of Canterbury to call for an emergency October
meeting of Anglican leaders.
Yet for all the institutional turmoil, some parishioners and church
leaders at several moderate-to-liberal Philadelphia churches yesterday were
generally sanguine.
And even the prominent rector of a conservative Anglican church said
yesterday that his parishioners felt a "sense of release" after the
decision, convinced that it meant a final split with the U.S. Episcopal
Church was near.
St. Mark's, at 16th and Locust Streets, is one of the oldest
Episcopal churches in the city. With its elaborate stonework, stained
glass, wooden crucifix and High Mass, it is in many respects a highly
traditional church.
But the parishioners are a diverse group, and yesterday they stressed
acceptance and openness while keeping ideological overtones to a minimum.
"These things are sublimely unimportant," said 50-year parishioner
Bob Ennis. Then, quoting early 20th-century novelist Dorothy L. Sayers,
Ennis said: "'As I grow older and older, and totter toward the tomb, I find
that I care less and less, Who goes to bed with whom.' "
At the Church of the Crucifixion on Eighth and Bainbridge Streets,
old-timers dismissed the debate with waves and chuckles.
"It was like this in 1976 when they started ordaining women," said
organist Robert Becker, 79. "After all the emotions settled down, everyone
closed ranks again and said, 'We are one church.'"
Like St. Mark's, the Church of the Crucifixion has had to be flexible
and focused on faith to survive 156 years in a changing South Philadelphia
neighborhood.
"What does this have to do with our prayers?" asked Mabel Ballard,
78, of South Philadelphia.
The Rev. Joseph Wildsmith, who was visiting the Church of the
Crucifixion, gave a straightforward sermon on "Christ's acceptance of those
who murmured against him," with only one hint of the controversy that has
conservative Episcopalians contemplating a divorce from the U.S. church.
"I did do a prayer of unity, but I trust the church to find its way,"
Wildsmith said. "The Episcopal church held up through everything before.
It'll hold up over this."
But it won't "hold up" if the Rev. David L. Moyer can help it. The
rector of the conservative Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont, Moyer
considers reconciliation not just impossible, but undesirable as well.
"We're still in the Episcopal Church technically, but our people
believe it's been dying for years. It's kind of given up the cross," said
Moyer, who was defrocked by local Episcopal Bishop Charles Bennison last
year. Moyer is now under the oversight of the more conservative prelate of
the Province of Central Africa.
Moyer said "pirates" had taken over the U.S. Episcopal Church. "They
have taken the Episcopal Church out of the Anglican community," Moyer said.
"They're the schismatics."
Parishioners and clergy at the Church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields in
Chestnut Hill were equally emphatic in their views, but they supported the
church's increasing acceptance of gay clergy.
John Kane, 24, a preschool teacher from Warrington visiting the
church for the first time, said he thought that it was a "very bold move,
but a good move." He said, "I think it's great for the church to really
expand itself in the acceptance of people."
Lifelong parishioner Ginny Smith, 80, said she was "utterly thrilled"
at the "long overdue" appointment of an openly gay bishop, even though she
knew it would be difficult for many Episcopalians to accept.
But the "raging bonfire" his confirmation has created within the
church will be worth the torment in the long run, the Rev. Sharline Fulton
said in her sermon yesterday.
"The church is articulating a new understanding of who God is and the
refore who we are as derivations of God," Fulton said. "We don't dunk
people under water anymore to see if they're witches. We're finally getting
it."
Gay issues challenge Episcopal churches, Manchester Cathedral chiefs have NOT agreed to let gay American bishop-elect Canon Gene Robinson preach there
1. SOUTH FLORIDA SUN-SENTINEL Gay issues challenge Episcopal churches
2. SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Split is showing over gay bishop;
Episcopalians around region grapple with how to respond
3. MANCHESTER EVENING NEWS (England) The gay guessing game: Manchester Cathedral chiefs have NOT agreed to let gay American bishop-elect Canon Gene Robinson preach there in October
4. HARTFORD COURANT Church Vote Hits Home: Gay Issue Divides State
Episcopalians
South Florida Sun-Sentinel, August 11, 2003
200 E. Las Olas, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 33301
(Fax: 954-356-4624 ) (E-Mail: letters@sun-sentinel.com )
( http://www.sun-sentinel.com )
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-ppepsicopalaug11,1,7693
391.story?coll=sfla-news-palm
Gay issues challenge Episcopal churches
By Mike Clary, Staff Writer
Lake Worth - The controversy over homosexuality and religion has long
been defused at St. Andrew's Episcopal Church.
This pioneer Palm Beach County church established a ministry
especially for gays and lesbians almost two years before Episcopalian
leaders tackled the vexing issue at a national convention last week,
triggering a debate that reverberated across the United States and into the
White House.
Through a program called Integrity-Palm Beach, Christian services
aimed at gay worshippers are conducted each Saturday evening by the Rev.
Richard T. Nolan, a retired Episcopal priest who has been in a committed gay
relationship for almost five decades.
Now the Rev. William Hamilton, St. Andrew's rector, said he is
prepared to take the next step: join same-sex couples in holy matrimony.
Hamilton said he expected to discuss the matter Tuesday with Leo
Frade, bishop of the Diocese of Southeast Florida, who has invited about 100
diocesan leaders to lunch at the church's Duncan Center in Delray Beach. "I
have never thought of myself as a renegade," said Hamilton, 62. "But if my
bishop gives the OK, I am ready."
In a telephone interview Sunday from Key West, where he is
vacationing, Frade said he was unlikely to accede to Hamilton's request.
"My policy is, and will continue to be, not to authorize the blessing of
same-sex unions," said Frade, who presides over 82 churches in a diocese
stretching from Martin County to Key West. "The time is not here yet."
At its national convention in Minneapolis, the Episcopal Church voted
to confirm openly gay Rev. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire in what
many of those in the majority termed a move toward inclusiveness. Frade
said he had first planned on abstaining but voted in favor of Robinson's
confirmation "after prayer and fasting."
The convention also agreed that dioceses conducting same-sex
blessings are operating within doctrinal boundaries. But in what was seen
as a compromise with conservatives, church leaders stopped short of
authorizing a common liturgy for celebrating same-sex unions.
Nonetheless, in an address to Integrity on Saturday, Nolan lauded the
convention's vote on Robinson as "an extraordinary occasion in the evolution
of the Christian Church. ... It is a moment not of winning or losing, but
one of exceptional evolution," he said.
Still, the ecclesiastical battle over homosexuality is far from
complete. At St. Benedict's Episcopal Church in Plantation, the Rev. Robert
J. DeShaies preached tolerance but acknowledged the schism is rocking the
faithful. "What saddens me is the polarization and division that will occur
in the church due to these actions of the convention," the minister told the
congregation Sunday.
Among the aggrieved was St. Benedict's congregant Roy Aguilar, 69, of
Sunrise. "I have always stood up against homosexuality and I am personally
thinking of leaving the church," he said. "A lot of parishioners are taking
it very hard."
Episcopalians are not the only believers roiled by the issue. In the
wake of the June U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down state sodomy
laws, the Roman Catholic Church, several conservative Protestant
denominations and President Bush have voiced strong opposition to same-sex
unions.
Although public opinion surveys track a growing acceptance of
homosexuality and gay marriage over the past decade, a recent Gallup/USA
Today poll shows some backlash among Americans since the high court
decision. Respondents who said they support legalizing homosexual relations
between consenting adults dropped from 60 percent in May to 48 percent in
July.
In his homily to about 60 worshippers Sunday, Hamilton said little
about the historic convention vote. Instead, he mentioned the power of God
evident in Thursday's tornado that ravaged parts of Palm Beach County, the
life lessons imparted by his junior high school biology teacher and the
inspiration to be found in the 1990 movie Edward Scissorhands. "God wants
us to do our thing, naturally, without being forced," he said, turning the
journey of Johnny Depp's character into a parable.
Over coffee and dessert in the social hall of St. Andrew's,
established 89 years ago, Hamilton said that although the convention's
closely watched vote was much on his mind, "I thought the most important
thing I could do was not to make an issue of what we do as individuals. Our
concerns are still what they always are: the poor, the hungry, the abused."
Indeed, for Vance Oden and other gay and lesbian church members, the
fight for acceptance at St. Andrew's was won in October 2001, when Integrity
was formed and a handful of parishioners walked out in protest.
For many gay and lesbian church members, formal recognition of
same-sex unions seems not to be a pressing issue.
"I am willing to wait on the church at large to get there," said
Oden, 36. "I don't feel my relationship has to be blessed to be valid.
Acceptance at this church is wonderful."
. Staff Writer Sallie James contributed to this report. Mike Clary
can be reached at mwclary@sun-sentinel.com or 561-243-6629.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer, August 11, 2003
101 Elliot Avenue W, Seattle, WA, 98119
(Fax: 206-448-8184 ) (E-Mail: editpage@seattle-pi.com )
( http://www.seattle-pi.com/ )
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/134497_episcopalians11.html
Split is showing over gay bishop
Episcopalians around region grapple with how to respond
By Debera Carlton Harrell, Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter
Local Episcopal leaders praised and criticized the election of an
openly gay bishop from New Hampshire in church services yesterday,
reflecting a split in the worldwide Anglican community.
The Episcopal Church's House of Bishops Tuesday approved Gene
Robinson, 56, as bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire during its
general convention in Minneapolis. The historic appointment made headlines,
caused conservatives to denounce the decision and prompted the archbishop of
Canterbury to call a meeting of Anglican Communion leaders in London in
October.
On the first Sunday since Robinson's election, some in the Puget
Sound area called the move a triumph of inclusiveness, while others
expressed concern over what they called a departure from Scripture.
"On balance, I see it as a good thing," said the Rev. Bill Harper of
Grace Episcopal Church on Bainbridge Island, strengthening the church as a
place "encompassing a wide range of beliefs" where people "can still call
themselves Episcopalians."
Meanwhile, at St. Luke's Episcopal Church in Seattle, parishioners
signed a petition of "repudiation and disassociation from the actions" of
the general convention.
The election of the "Rev. Gene Robinson, a man engaged in sexual
activity outside of the bonds of Holy Matrimony ... directly contradicts
Holy Scripture, the traditions of the Church and our own constitution. They
also imperil our relationship with the worldwide Anglican Communion," the
petition states.
The Rev. John Roddam, who drafted the petition, urged his flock to
refrain from judgment and respond with compassion toward homosexuals.
Echoing other conservative church leaders, Roddam said the focus - for
everyone - should be on restoring a "right relationship with God."
"This is a clear watershed moment indicating where our church is ...
to recognize we have different belief systems," Roddam said. "We have no
basis to point fingers at others, other than to respond with compassion ...
While we do not agree with the decision, we must remember ... God so loved
the world - the whole world, not just heterosexuals."
Many congregants, as well as local leaders, said the source of the
rift is scriptural authority, not homophobia or intolerance.
"If you accept the sovereignty of God and the Bible as his word, you
don't have the right to go around changing what you don't like," said Daphne
Burkhalter, a St. Luke's parishioner. Burkhalter said she supports her
congregation but wants to withhold financial support that would go to the
Episcopalian Diocese of Olympia, based in Seattle, of which St. Luke's is a
member.
Some said they hope the issue of homosexuality will be resolved so
the church can address what they deem to be more core issues, such as
hunger, poverty and healing.
In yesterday's services, congregants prayed for those who are
unemployed, dealing with cancer or who have lost loved ones. One man at St.
Luke's, his voice cracking, asked for parishioners to pray for a child
needing a bone marrow transplant.
The Rev. Steve Gehrig of St. Margaret's Episcopal Church in Bellevue
said he is concerned that the world-wide church will perceive the United
States as "doing its own thing and operating unilaterally" - even though the
African Anglican community in Nigeria, for example, "is eight times larger
than ours." There are an estimated 19 million Episcopalians in Nigeria,
local leaders said, compared with 3 million in the United States.
The Episcopalian Diocese of Olympia represents 68 churches and 37,000
Episcopalians in Western Washington. The diocese's Bishop Vincent Warner
and eight deputies voted to elect Robinson at the convention.
The Episcopalian Diocese of Spokane also was unanimous in its support
of Robinson.
Warner said he did not hesitate to vote in favor of Robinson, a
colleague he has known for 20 years.
"I'm delighted about Gene," Warner said. "I understand people have
concern about the primacy of Scripture; there are different interpretations
... but the basic gospel message is one of inclusiveness and grace."
Robert Taylor, dean of St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral in Seattle,
called the election of Robinson "a Holy Spirit moment."
"Our God is a God of generous love and hope, always embracing those
who the Church might not fully embrace," Taylor, the first openly gay priest
elected as dean of an Episcopal cathedral, said in a media statement.
"While the institution of the Church has often battled over who to
keep out, the story of God is a different one - God is always inviting,
including and celebrating the richness of all people, be they black, white,
gay, straight, rich or poor."
"I think our work now is about reconciliation," Warner said.
. P-I reporter Debera Carlton Harrell can be reached at 206-448-8326
or deberaharrell@seattlepi.com
Manchester Evening News, 11 August 2003
164 Deansgate, Manchester, M60 2RD, England
( http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk )
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/stories/Detail_LinkStory=64917.html
The gay guessing game
Manchester Cathedral chiefs have NOT agreed to let gay American bishop-elect
Canon Gene Robinson preach there in October, it has emerged.
The archdeacon and canon of Manchester said no formal request had
been made for the cleric to take part in a service marking a conference
discussing homosexuality in the Anglican Church.
The Venerable Alan Wolstencroft said "normal procedure" meant the
details of the service must be agreed with Church leaders in advance.
Confirmed
Canon Robinson triggered a major rift in the worldwide Anglican
community when voted in as the new bishop of New Hampshire earlier this
week.
He is a guest at the Halfway to Lambeth conference in Manchester,
organised by the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, on October 24-26.
The event, based at Manchester University, will focus on the nature
and place of homosexuality in the Church.
The archdeacon and canon said in a statement: "No invitation has been
extended or request made for Canon Gene Robinson to preach at the LGCM
conference service in October.
"The normal procedure for organisations wishing to use the cathedral
is for the order of service and suggested preacher to be discussed and
agreed by the dean and canons."
A spokesman for the LGCM said: "Canon Robinson is a keynote speaker
at the conference.
"What happens at the cathedral is still being negotiated. We are
talking to the cathedral, but nothing has been settled.
"Everyone coming to the conference is invited to the service. It
would be very unlikely Canon Robinson would not be part of the service but
in what capacity we don't yet know.
"It would be gravely discourteous to make any announcements which had
not been agreed with the cathedral."
Archbishops in Australia, Africa and Egypt have already spoken out
against the controversial appointment of Canon Robinson.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has called a meeting
of bishops to discuss the issue of homosexual priests.
The summit is due to take place in mid-October - days before the
Manchester conference.
Dr Williams, who cancelled an appearance at the Halfway to Lambeth
conference earlier this year, said: "I am clear that the anxieties caused by
recent developments have reached the point where we will need to sit down
and discuss their consequences."
Hartford Courant, August 11, 2003
285 Broad St., Hartford, CT, 06115
(Fax: 860-241-3865 ) (E-Mail: letters@courant.com )
( http://www.courant.com/ )
http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-episcopals0811.artaug11,0,1262609.story?c
oll=hc-headlines-local
Church Vote Hits Home
Gay Issue Divides State Episcopalians
By Arielle Levin Becker, Courant Staff Writer
At the Saturday evening service at St. John's Episcopal Church in
North Haven, parishioners offered verbal additions to a printed list of the
congregation's prayers.
"North Korea, Liberia," one woman said as the congregation prayed.
"Iraq," a man added from a middle pew.
Moments later, the presiding priest offered an additional prayer from
the altar.
"For the unity and strength of the Episcopal Church," the Rev.
Christopher Beeley said.
Parishioners had mixed reactions to the tumultuous week since the
ordination of the church's first openly gay bishop ignited an international
uproar and threats of a church schism.
Some said they were deeply concerned with the General Convention's
vote to ordain the Rev. V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire, though
many were confident in their own churches.
Others were worried about the divisions between the American
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion worldwide, where several leaders
have criticized Robinson's ordination and threatened a split.
A number of churchgoers considered the vote a cause for pride in the
church's progress, and said it would not affect their daily lives or local
congregations.
For some, the decision brought them back to the Episcopal Church.
After a summer spent "shopping around," Gloria Mengual returned to
Christ Church Cathedral in Hartford Sunday.
Mengual came to Christ Church three years ago after a friend told her
it was friendly to gays and lesbians. It had been a relief, she said, from
the days when she worked at a Catholic hospital and told people about her
"boyfriend" at home - who was actually a woman.
Mengual said she decided recently to attend a Congregational church,
out of concern that some people at Christ Church did not fully accept
homosexuals.
Last week, however, as she watched the General Convention on public
television, Mengual decided to return to Christ Church.
"Something just keeps pulling me back," Mengual said.
At Christ Church's Sunday morning service, the Rev. Linda Spiers
described the week she spent at the convention, saying she was proud of the
decision to ordain Robinson. But Spiers also said she knew that while some
members of the congregation would rejoice, others would weep.
The Rev. Anne Mallonee, the church's interim dean, asked parishioners
for feedback about how to best address people's concerns about the
convention. She said she was confident that the congregation, which has
been discussing racial tensions since the Rodney King beating in 1992 and
has ministered to transsexuals since the 1960s, would withstand the current
tensions.
Where Robinson's ordination was less popular, parishioners said they
still trusted in their own churches to get through the turmoil.
William Vincent, a Granby resident who attends Trinity Episcopal
Church in Simsbury's Tariffville section, said he cried when he saw the
results of the vote on America Online.
He called it "the most despicable thing I ever heard." But he said
he remains confident in Trinity. "Our church here is safe," he said.
Vincent said he is not homophobic and works with people who are gay.
Instead, he fears the decision to ordain a gay bishop would open the
floodgates for other unprecedented actions that could damage Christian
tradition.
"It sends a suggestion to people that if this happens, everything
else is down the chute," he said. "Two thousand years of Christian teaching
and doctrines is out the window."
In a back pew at Trinity Episcopal Sunday, a Tariffville man
whispered prayers into his hands as parishioners received communion during
the 7:45 a.m. service. He had come to pray for the congregation, he said.
The man, named Gary, would not give his last name. He said he had
happened upon Trinity during a morning prayer walk and decided to show
support for parishioners after what he called a "disgrace."
"It just is a very sad time for these people," he said.
But not everyone in Trinity was upset by last week's decision. One
woman, a longtime parishioner who asked not to be named because "this is a
conservative church," said she supports the ruling.
"I believe the Christian teaching is to love everyone," she said,
whispering to avoid being heard by others in the church. "I think we need
to take our own inventory, not other people's."
Many parishioners and clergy members who expressed reservations about
the decision said they worried more about the tensions between the American
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion worldwide than about
homosexuality.
At Christ Episcopal Church in Middle Haddam, the Rev. Mark Given
devoted his second sermon in a row to the General Convention. Given said he
was most concerned with how Anglicans in the rest of the world perceived the
American church, and compared the American Episcopal Church to the United
States before the war with Iraq.
"We're at 2.3 million out of 70 million [people], but our General
Convention has decided with its determined majority to basically go it
alone, the same thing that America does with its foreign policy," he said.
Given said some of his parishioners were unsure how to react to the
vote for Robinson on religious grounds without appearing homophobic.
"People are reticent to talk about it because in today's day and age,
to be seen as against anything just feels so negative," Given said.
"There's something funny in the air. I think that people are confused that
you can be for the civil rights and civil unions in a homosexual community,
but you can also express the inherited continuing Christian views on the
matter."
At St. John's Episcopal Church in West Hartford, many parishioners
said they supported the vote and thought it would have little local impact.
But some said it would have a big impact on their lives or the lives
of their families.
Jocelyn Hannahs of Enfield said she had been following the General
Convention with a young relative who is gay and very interested in religion.
During a one-day delay, when the church investigated allegations against
Robinson of inappropriate contact, Hannahs' relative told her he had never
felt unloved by God because he is gay, except when other Christians told him
he was unlovable.
Hannahs said she was proud of the decision. She said she hoped the
anger it caused could be reconciled.
"There's gonna be some trouble, but not too much," she said.Then she added, "Maybe I'm just naïve."
2. SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Split is showing over gay bishop;
Episcopalians around region grapple with how to respond
3. MANCHESTER EVENING NEWS (England) The gay guessing game: Manchester Cathedral chiefs have NOT agreed to let gay American bishop-elect Canon Gene Robinson preach there in October
4. HARTFORD COURANT Church Vote Hits Home: Gay Issue Divides State
Episcopalians
South Florida Sun-Sentinel, August 11, 2003
200 E. Las Olas, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 33301
(Fax: 954-356-4624 ) (E-Mail: letters@sun-sentinel.com )
( http://www.sun-sentinel.com )
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-ppepsicopalaug11,1,7693
391.story?coll=sfla-news-palm
Gay issues challenge Episcopal churches
By Mike Clary, Staff Writer
Lake Worth - The controversy over homosexuality and religion has long
been defused at St. Andrew's Episcopal Church.
This pioneer Palm Beach County church established a ministry
especially for gays and lesbians almost two years before Episcopalian
leaders tackled the vexing issue at a national convention last week,
triggering a debate that reverberated across the United States and into the
White House.
Through a program called Integrity-Palm Beach, Christian services
aimed at gay worshippers are conducted each Saturday evening by the Rev.
Richard T. Nolan, a retired Episcopal priest who has been in a committed gay
relationship for almost five decades.
Now the Rev. William Hamilton, St. Andrew's rector, said he is
prepared to take the next step: join same-sex couples in holy matrimony.
Hamilton said he expected to discuss the matter Tuesday with Leo
Frade, bishop of the Diocese of Southeast Florida, who has invited about 100
diocesan leaders to lunch at the church's Duncan Center in Delray Beach. "I
have never thought of myself as a renegade," said Hamilton, 62. "But if my
bishop gives the OK, I am ready."
In a telephone interview Sunday from Key West, where he is
vacationing, Frade said he was unlikely to accede to Hamilton's request.
"My policy is, and will continue to be, not to authorize the blessing of
same-sex unions," said Frade, who presides over 82 churches in a diocese
stretching from Martin County to Key West. "The time is not here yet."
At its national convention in Minneapolis, the Episcopal Church voted
to confirm openly gay Rev. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire in what
many of those in the majority termed a move toward inclusiveness. Frade
said he had first planned on abstaining but voted in favor of Robinson's
confirmation "after prayer and fasting."
The convention also agreed that dioceses conducting same-sex
blessings are operating within doctrinal boundaries. But in what was seen
as a compromise with conservatives, church leaders stopped short of
authorizing a common liturgy for celebrating same-sex unions.
Nonetheless, in an address to Integrity on Saturday, Nolan lauded the
convention's vote on Robinson as "an extraordinary occasion in the evolution
of the Christian Church. ... It is a moment not of winning or losing, but
one of exceptional evolution," he said.
Still, the ecclesiastical battle over homosexuality is far from
complete. At St. Benedict's Episcopal Church in Plantation, the Rev. Robert
J. DeShaies preached tolerance but acknowledged the schism is rocking the
faithful. "What saddens me is the polarization and division that will occur
in the church due to these actions of the convention," the minister told the
congregation Sunday.
Among the aggrieved was St. Benedict's congregant Roy Aguilar, 69, of
Sunrise. "I have always stood up against homosexuality and I am personally
thinking of leaving the church," he said. "A lot of parishioners are taking
it very hard."
Episcopalians are not the only believers roiled by the issue. In the
wake of the June U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down state sodomy
laws, the Roman Catholic Church, several conservative Protestant
denominations and President Bush have voiced strong opposition to same-sex
unions.
Although public opinion surveys track a growing acceptance of
homosexuality and gay marriage over the past decade, a recent Gallup/USA
Today poll shows some backlash among Americans since the high court
decision. Respondents who said they support legalizing homosexual relations
between consenting adults dropped from 60 percent in May to 48 percent in
July.
In his homily to about 60 worshippers Sunday, Hamilton said little
about the historic convention vote. Instead, he mentioned the power of God
evident in Thursday's tornado that ravaged parts of Palm Beach County, the
life lessons imparted by his junior high school biology teacher and the
inspiration to be found in the 1990 movie Edward Scissorhands. "God wants
us to do our thing, naturally, without being forced," he said, turning the
journey of Johnny Depp's character into a parable.
Over coffee and dessert in the social hall of St. Andrew's,
established 89 years ago, Hamilton said that although the convention's
closely watched vote was much on his mind, "I thought the most important
thing I could do was not to make an issue of what we do as individuals. Our
concerns are still what they always are: the poor, the hungry, the abused."
Indeed, for Vance Oden and other gay and lesbian church members, the
fight for acceptance at St. Andrew's was won in October 2001, when Integrity
was formed and a handful of parishioners walked out in protest.
For many gay and lesbian church members, formal recognition of
same-sex unions seems not to be a pressing issue.
"I am willing to wait on the church at large to get there," said
Oden, 36. "I don't feel my relationship has to be blessed to be valid.
Acceptance at this church is wonderful."
. Staff Writer Sallie James contributed to this report. Mike Clary
can be reached at mwclary@sun-sentinel.com or 561-243-6629.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer, August 11, 2003
101 Elliot Avenue W, Seattle, WA, 98119
(Fax: 206-448-8184 ) (E-Mail: editpage@seattle-pi.com )
( http://www.seattle-pi.com/ )
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/134497_episcopalians11.html
Split is showing over gay bishop
Episcopalians around region grapple with how to respond
By Debera Carlton Harrell, Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter
Local Episcopal leaders praised and criticized the election of an
openly gay bishop from New Hampshire in church services yesterday,
reflecting a split in the worldwide Anglican community.
The Episcopal Church's House of Bishops Tuesday approved Gene
Robinson, 56, as bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire during its
general convention in Minneapolis. The historic appointment made headlines,
caused conservatives to denounce the decision and prompted the archbishop of
Canterbury to call a meeting of Anglican Communion leaders in London in
October.
On the first Sunday since Robinson's election, some in the Puget
Sound area called the move a triumph of inclusiveness, while others
expressed concern over what they called a departure from Scripture.
"On balance, I see it as a good thing," said the Rev. Bill Harper of
Grace Episcopal Church on Bainbridge Island, strengthening the church as a
place "encompassing a wide range of beliefs" where people "can still call
themselves Episcopalians."
Meanwhile, at St. Luke's Episcopal Church in Seattle, parishioners
signed a petition of "repudiation and disassociation from the actions" of
the general convention.
The election of the "Rev. Gene Robinson, a man engaged in sexual
activity outside of the bonds of Holy Matrimony ... directly contradicts
Holy Scripture, the traditions of the Church and our own constitution. They
also imperil our relationship with the worldwide Anglican Communion," the
petition states.
The Rev. John Roddam, who drafted the petition, urged his flock to
refrain from judgment and respond with compassion toward homosexuals.
Echoing other conservative church leaders, Roddam said the focus - for
everyone - should be on restoring a "right relationship with God."
"This is a clear watershed moment indicating where our church is ...
to recognize we have different belief systems," Roddam said. "We have no
basis to point fingers at others, other than to respond with compassion ...
While we do not agree with the decision, we must remember ... God so loved
the world - the whole world, not just heterosexuals."
Many congregants, as well as local leaders, said the source of the
rift is scriptural authority, not homophobia or intolerance.
"If you accept the sovereignty of God and the Bible as his word, you
don't have the right to go around changing what you don't like," said Daphne
Burkhalter, a St. Luke's parishioner. Burkhalter said she supports her
congregation but wants to withhold financial support that would go to the
Episcopalian Diocese of Olympia, based in Seattle, of which St. Luke's is a
member.
Some said they hope the issue of homosexuality will be resolved so
the church can address what they deem to be more core issues, such as
hunger, poverty and healing.
In yesterday's services, congregants prayed for those who are
unemployed, dealing with cancer or who have lost loved ones. One man at St.
Luke's, his voice cracking, asked for parishioners to pray for a child
needing a bone marrow transplant.
The Rev. Steve Gehrig of St. Margaret's Episcopal Church in Bellevue
said he is concerned that the world-wide church will perceive the United
States as "doing its own thing and operating unilaterally" - even though the
African Anglican community in Nigeria, for example, "is eight times larger
than ours." There are an estimated 19 million Episcopalians in Nigeria,
local leaders said, compared with 3 million in the United States.
The Episcopalian Diocese of Olympia represents 68 churches and 37,000
Episcopalians in Western Washington. The diocese's Bishop Vincent Warner
and eight deputies voted to elect Robinson at the convention.
The Episcopalian Diocese of Spokane also was unanimous in its support
of Robinson.
Warner said he did not hesitate to vote in favor of Robinson, a
colleague he has known for 20 years.
"I'm delighted about Gene," Warner said. "I understand people have
concern about the primacy of Scripture; there are different interpretations
... but the basic gospel message is one of inclusiveness and grace."
Robert Taylor, dean of St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral in Seattle,
called the election of Robinson "a Holy Spirit moment."
"Our God is a God of generous love and hope, always embracing those
who the Church might not fully embrace," Taylor, the first openly gay priest
elected as dean of an Episcopal cathedral, said in a media statement.
"While the institution of the Church has often battled over who to
keep out, the story of God is a different one - God is always inviting,
including and celebrating the richness of all people, be they black, white,
gay, straight, rich or poor."
"I think our work now is about reconciliation," Warner said.
. P-I reporter Debera Carlton Harrell can be reached at 206-448-8326
or deberaharrell@seattlepi.com
Manchester Evening News, 11 August 2003
164 Deansgate, Manchester, M60 2RD, England
( http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk )
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/stories/Detail_LinkStory=64917.html
The gay guessing game
Manchester Cathedral chiefs have NOT agreed to let gay American bishop-elect
Canon Gene Robinson preach there in October, it has emerged.
The archdeacon and canon of Manchester said no formal request had
been made for the cleric to take part in a service marking a conference
discussing homosexuality in the Anglican Church.
The Venerable Alan Wolstencroft said "normal procedure" meant the
details of the service must be agreed with Church leaders in advance.
Confirmed
Canon Robinson triggered a major rift in the worldwide Anglican
community when voted in as the new bishop of New Hampshire earlier this
week.
He is a guest at the Halfway to Lambeth conference in Manchester,
organised by the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, on October 24-26.
The event, based at Manchester University, will focus on the nature
and place of homosexuality in the Church.
The archdeacon and canon said in a statement: "No invitation has been
extended or request made for Canon Gene Robinson to preach at the LGCM
conference service in October.
"The normal procedure for organisations wishing to use the cathedral
is for the order of service and suggested preacher to be discussed and
agreed by the dean and canons."
A spokesman for the LGCM said: "Canon Robinson is a keynote speaker
at the conference.
"What happens at the cathedral is still being negotiated. We are
talking to the cathedral, but nothing has been settled.
"Everyone coming to the conference is invited to the service. It
would be very unlikely Canon Robinson would not be part of the service but
in what capacity we don't yet know.
"It would be gravely discourteous to make any announcements which had
not been agreed with the cathedral."
Archbishops in Australia, Africa and Egypt have already spoken out
against the controversial appointment of Canon Robinson.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has called a meeting
of bishops to discuss the issue of homosexual priests.
The summit is due to take place in mid-October - days before the
Manchester conference.
Dr Williams, who cancelled an appearance at the Halfway to Lambeth
conference earlier this year, said: "I am clear that the anxieties caused by
recent developments have reached the point where we will need to sit down
and discuss their consequences."
Hartford Courant, August 11, 2003
285 Broad St., Hartford, CT, 06115
(Fax: 860-241-3865 ) (E-Mail: letters@courant.com )
( http://www.courant.com/ )
http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-episcopals0811.artaug11,0,1262609.story?c
oll=hc-headlines-local
Church Vote Hits Home
Gay Issue Divides State Episcopalians
By Arielle Levin Becker, Courant Staff Writer
At the Saturday evening service at St. John's Episcopal Church in
North Haven, parishioners offered verbal additions to a printed list of the
congregation's prayers.
"North Korea, Liberia," one woman said as the congregation prayed.
"Iraq," a man added from a middle pew.
Moments later, the presiding priest offered an additional prayer from
the altar.
"For the unity and strength of the Episcopal Church," the Rev.
Christopher Beeley said.
Parishioners had mixed reactions to the tumultuous week since the
ordination of the church's first openly gay bishop ignited an international
uproar and threats of a church schism.
Some said they were deeply concerned with the General Convention's
vote to ordain the Rev. V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire, though
many were confident in their own churches.
Others were worried about the divisions between the American
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion worldwide, where several leaders
have criticized Robinson's ordination and threatened a split.
A number of churchgoers considered the vote a cause for pride in the
church's progress, and said it would not affect their daily lives or local
congregations.
For some, the decision brought them back to the Episcopal Church.
After a summer spent "shopping around," Gloria Mengual returned to
Christ Church Cathedral in Hartford Sunday.
Mengual came to Christ Church three years ago after a friend told her
it was friendly to gays and lesbians. It had been a relief, she said, from
the days when she worked at a Catholic hospital and told people about her
"boyfriend" at home - who was actually a woman.
Mengual said she decided recently to attend a Congregational church,
out of concern that some people at Christ Church did not fully accept
homosexuals.
Last week, however, as she watched the General Convention on public
television, Mengual decided to return to Christ Church.
"Something just keeps pulling me back," Mengual said.
At Christ Church's Sunday morning service, the Rev. Linda Spiers
described the week she spent at the convention, saying she was proud of the
decision to ordain Robinson. But Spiers also said she knew that while some
members of the congregation would rejoice, others would weep.
The Rev. Anne Mallonee, the church's interim dean, asked parishioners
for feedback about how to best address people's concerns about the
convention. She said she was confident that the congregation, which has
been discussing racial tensions since the Rodney King beating in 1992 and
has ministered to transsexuals since the 1960s, would withstand the current
tensions.
Where Robinson's ordination was less popular, parishioners said they
still trusted in their own churches to get through the turmoil.
William Vincent, a Granby resident who attends Trinity Episcopal
Church in Simsbury's Tariffville section, said he cried when he saw the
results of the vote on America Online.
He called it "the most despicable thing I ever heard." But he said
he remains confident in Trinity. "Our church here is safe," he said.
Vincent said he is not homophobic and works with people who are gay.
Instead, he fears the decision to ordain a gay bishop would open the
floodgates for other unprecedented actions that could damage Christian
tradition.
"It sends a suggestion to people that if this happens, everything
else is down the chute," he said. "Two thousand years of Christian teaching
and doctrines is out the window."
In a back pew at Trinity Episcopal Sunday, a Tariffville man
whispered prayers into his hands as parishioners received communion during
the 7:45 a.m. service. He had come to pray for the congregation, he said.
The man, named Gary, would not give his last name. He said he had
happened upon Trinity during a morning prayer walk and decided to show
support for parishioners after what he called a "disgrace."
"It just is a very sad time for these people," he said.
But not everyone in Trinity was upset by last week's decision. One
woman, a longtime parishioner who asked not to be named because "this is a
conservative church," said she supports the ruling.
"I believe the Christian teaching is to love everyone," she said,
whispering to avoid being heard by others in the church. "I think we need
to take our own inventory, not other people's."
Many parishioners and clergy members who expressed reservations about
the decision said they worried more about the tensions between the American
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion worldwide than about
homosexuality.
At Christ Episcopal Church in Middle Haddam, the Rev. Mark Given
devoted his second sermon in a row to the General Convention. Given said he
was most concerned with how Anglicans in the rest of the world perceived the
American church, and compared the American Episcopal Church to the United
States before the war with Iraq.
"We're at 2.3 million out of 70 million [people], but our General
Convention has decided with its determined majority to basically go it
alone, the same thing that America does with its foreign policy," he said.
Given said some of his parishioners were unsure how to react to the
vote for Robinson on religious grounds without appearing homophobic.
"People are reticent to talk about it because in today's day and age,
to be seen as against anything just feels so negative," Given said.
"There's something funny in the air. I think that people are confused that
you can be for the civil rights and civil unions in a homosexual community,
but you can also express the inherited continuing Christian views on the
matter."
At St. John's Episcopal Church in West Hartford, many parishioners
said they supported the vote and thought it would have little local impact.
But some said it would have a big impact on their lives or the lives
of their families.
Jocelyn Hannahs of Enfield said she had been following the General
Convention with a young relative who is gay and very interested in religion.
During a one-day delay, when the church investigated allegations against
Robinson of inappropriate contact, Hannahs' relative told her he had never
felt unloved by God because he is gay, except when other Christians told him
he was unlovable.
Hannahs said she was proud of the decision. She said she hoped the
anger it caused could be reconciled.
"There's gonna be some trouble, but not too much," she said.Then she added, "Maybe I'm just naïve."
Hoedowns a hit with gay groups
San Jose Mercury News, August 11, 2003
750 Ridder Park Drive, San Jose, CA, 95190
(Fax: 408-271-3792 ) (E-Mail: letters@sjmercury.com )
( http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews )
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/6506328.htm
Hoedowns a hit with gay groups
By Julie Patel, Mercury News
With a deep voice and Southern twang, the man wearing a flannel shirt
crooned into a microphone: "Do-si-do your corner, once around you go."
In response, the dancers passed each other, right shoulder to right
shoulder, and circled each other, back to back.
"Where are the girls?" asked Andy Shore, 44, the man with the
microphone.
The hands of two women and 10 men flew into the air.
This was no ordinary square-dancing session.
Despite traditional gender roles typically associated with square
dancing, hoedowns have become a hit among Bay Area gays and lesbians who
find it a fun way to socialize and meet new people.
Six gay and lesbian square-dance groups have formed over the past 20
years in the Bay Area, even as mainstream square dancing has dropped in
popularity, said Jim Davis of the Santa Clara Valley Square Dancers
Association, which represents 18 square-dance clubs.
The dance groups also are attracting some straight dancers who
dislike the dress code and "couples only" rules of mainstream square
dancing.
"This gives me another place to dance," June Genis said last week at
a dance session hosted by El Camino Reelers, a gay and lesbian square-dance
group, at St. Andrew's United Methodist Church in Palo Alto. "With straight
groups, girls are always girls and boys are always boys."
In El Camino Reelers and other groups like it, members learn both
parts, making it easier for single folks like Genis to jump into a dance
with any partner - man or woman. But it creates a challenge for Shore, who
has trouble keeping track of the dancers.
Many dance forms - such as swing, salsa or ballroom - are one-on-one,
but square dancing involves a lot of teamwork and group interaction.
"Particularly with the gay dancing groups, it's all about interacting
with people, not just your own husband or partner," said Patricia Sawin, an
anthropology professor specializing in folklore and gender at the University
of North Carolina. "You can flirt, socialize, meet people."
Denis Gomez, who was at an El Camino Reelers dance last week, said he
was skeptical when a friend suggested a square-dance outing about 10 years
ago. "I said, 'Square dancing? Are you serious?' Turns out I've met about
75 percent of my friends through square dancing."
There are typically four couples in each square and a caller who will
instruct them to do moves like "promenade," "wheel and deal," "pass through"
and "Ferris wheel." Gay and lesbian square dances are known for their
"frills" - moves added for fun in between counts.
"There's more hopping, hollering, high kicks - more energy," Davis
said.
It helps that dancers in gay and lesbian groups are closer to 35 than
65, the average age for mainstream square dancers. The popularity of
mainstream square dancing, he said, peaked in the 1950s and has waned as
that generation has aged.
One place you can still find young dancers is gym class.
"It reinforces positive social interactions with partners in group,
working to make patterns work," said Judy Young, executive director of the
National Association of Sports and Physical Education. "That's just as
important now as ever."
But she concedes that some of the values that school square dancing
was supposed to reinforce - such as teaching girls how to be ladies - are
outmoded.
Outmoded, too, are the dress codes required by most mainstream
groups, Sawin said. Women today are less likely to want to wear big hoop
skirts and ruffled petticoats. Men find the long-sleeve shirts and bow ties
too warm and constraining.
Sawin said the dress code speaks to the "hyper-heterosexual" culture
of traditional square dancing.
"The clothing was really about emphasizing standard heterosexual
gender differences," she said. "American square dancing was sort of a
conservative distortion or appropriation of the English and French country
dances it came from."
Gay square dancing is breaking some of the rules.
"One thing that's happened is that men are wearing skirts because
they're more comfortable and cooler and you can have fun having the skirt
swoosh around you," Sawin said of a dance group in Durham, N.C. "It's not
like being in drag. They're just saying that all options are open to
anybody who wants to try them."
There are other reasons square dancing is particularly popular in
Silicon Valley, said Rich Reel, who called and danced Wednesday.
"Lots of square dancers tend to be into math," Reel, a biotechnology
engineer, said. "Making dances work is a lot like figuring out a Rubik
Cube."
It's all about symmetry, said Gomez. "It helps to know geometry and
to understand patterns," he added as he watched the dancers form circles and
overlapping squares.
"Go up to the middle and back again," crooned Shore, as two lines of
dancers facing each other met like a wave rising to its crest.
It was past 9 p.m. at St. Andrew's when Shore belted out a country
rendition of the Everly Brothers' "All I Have to Do Is Dream" - the final
dance of the night.
At the end of the set, the dancers moved smoothly into circles,
facing each other. Still holding hands, they turned to face outward and
prepared to bid each other farewell, square-dancing style. Deliberately and
all at once, eight couples - 11 men and 5 women - piped: "Thaaaaank you."
. Contact Julie Patel at jpatel@mercurynews.com or (408) 271-3679.
750 Ridder Park Drive, San Jose, CA, 95190
(Fax: 408-271-3792 ) (E-Mail: letters@sjmercury.com )
( http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews )
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/6506328.htm
Hoedowns a hit with gay groups
By Julie Patel, Mercury News
With a deep voice and Southern twang, the man wearing a flannel shirt
crooned into a microphone: "Do-si-do your corner, once around you go."
In response, the dancers passed each other, right shoulder to right
shoulder, and circled each other, back to back.
"Where are the girls?" asked Andy Shore, 44, the man with the
microphone.
The hands of two women and 10 men flew into the air.
This was no ordinary square-dancing session.
Despite traditional gender roles typically associated with square
dancing, hoedowns have become a hit among Bay Area gays and lesbians who
find it a fun way to socialize and meet new people.
Six gay and lesbian square-dance groups have formed over the past 20
years in the Bay Area, even as mainstream square dancing has dropped in
popularity, said Jim Davis of the Santa Clara Valley Square Dancers
Association, which represents 18 square-dance clubs.
The dance groups also are attracting some straight dancers who
dislike the dress code and "couples only" rules of mainstream square
dancing.
"This gives me another place to dance," June Genis said last week at
a dance session hosted by El Camino Reelers, a gay and lesbian square-dance
group, at St. Andrew's United Methodist Church in Palo Alto. "With straight
groups, girls are always girls and boys are always boys."
In El Camino Reelers and other groups like it, members learn both
parts, making it easier for single folks like Genis to jump into a dance
with any partner - man or woman. But it creates a challenge for Shore, who
has trouble keeping track of the dancers.
Many dance forms - such as swing, salsa or ballroom - are one-on-one,
but square dancing involves a lot of teamwork and group interaction.
"Particularly with the gay dancing groups, it's all about interacting
with people, not just your own husband or partner," said Patricia Sawin, an
anthropology professor specializing in folklore and gender at the University
of North Carolina. "You can flirt, socialize, meet people."
Denis Gomez, who was at an El Camino Reelers dance last week, said he
was skeptical when a friend suggested a square-dance outing about 10 years
ago. "I said, 'Square dancing? Are you serious?' Turns out I've met about
75 percent of my friends through square dancing."
There are typically four couples in each square and a caller who will
instruct them to do moves like "promenade," "wheel and deal," "pass through"
and "Ferris wheel." Gay and lesbian square dances are known for their
"frills" - moves added for fun in between counts.
"There's more hopping, hollering, high kicks - more energy," Davis
said.
It helps that dancers in gay and lesbian groups are closer to 35 than
65, the average age for mainstream square dancers. The popularity of
mainstream square dancing, he said, peaked in the 1950s and has waned as
that generation has aged.
One place you can still find young dancers is gym class.
"It reinforces positive social interactions with partners in group,
working to make patterns work," said Judy Young, executive director of the
National Association of Sports and Physical Education. "That's just as
important now as ever."
But she concedes that some of the values that school square dancing
was supposed to reinforce - such as teaching girls how to be ladies - are
outmoded.
Outmoded, too, are the dress codes required by most mainstream
groups, Sawin said. Women today are less likely to want to wear big hoop
skirts and ruffled petticoats. Men find the long-sleeve shirts and bow ties
too warm and constraining.
Sawin said the dress code speaks to the "hyper-heterosexual" culture
of traditional square dancing.
"The clothing was really about emphasizing standard heterosexual
gender differences," she said. "American square dancing was sort of a
conservative distortion or appropriation of the English and French country
dances it came from."
Gay square dancing is breaking some of the rules.
"One thing that's happened is that men are wearing skirts because
they're more comfortable and cooler and you can have fun having the skirt
swoosh around you," Sawin said of a dance group in Durham, N.C. "It's not
like being in drag. They're just saying that all options are open to
anybody who wants to try them."
There are other reasons square dancing is particularly popular in
Silicon Valley, said Rich Reel, who called and danced Wednesday.
"Lots of square dancers tend to be into math," Reel, a biotechnology
engineer, said. "Making dances work is a lot like figuring out a Rubik
Cube."
It's all about symmetry, said Gomez. "It helps to know geometry and
to understand patterns," he added as he watched the dancers form circles and
overlapping squares.
"Go up to the middle and back again," crooned Shore, as two lines of
dancers facing each other met like a wave rising to its crest.
It was past 9 p.m. at St. Andrew's when Shore belted out a country
rendition of the Everly Brothers' "All I Have to Do Is Dream" - the final
dance of the night.
At the end of the set, the dancers moved smoothly into circles,
facing each other. Still holding hands, they turned to face outward and
prepared to bid each other farewell, square-dancing style. Deliberately and
all at once, eight couples - 11 men and 5 women - piped: "Thaaaaank you."
. Contact Julie Patel at jpatel@mercurynews.com or (408) 271-3679.
Lawyers consider gay adoption rights
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 11, 2003
72 Marietta Street NW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
(Fax: 404-526-5746 ) (E-Mail: journal@ajc.com )
( http://www.accessatlanta.com )
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0803/11gayadopt.html
Lawyers consider gay adoption rights
By Bill Rankin, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
SAN FRANCISCO - While national debate simmers over the issue of
same-sex marriage, the nation's largest legal group today will consider the
rights of gay and lesbian couples to adopt children.
In a vote scheduled for today, the American Bar Association's
governing body will vote on a resolution that applies to unmarried couples
who are either heterosexual or gay. It calls on the 410,000-member lawyer
group to support state laws and court rulings that permit joint adoptions
and second-parent adoptions by unmarried people.
"Recognizing these relationships is an essential means of protecting
the core rights of children," said Washington lawyer Mark Agrast, chairman
of an ABA individual rights committee. "Every child should have a legally
recognized relationship to each parent."
The issue is before the lawyer group only weeks after the U.S.
Supreme Court decriminalized gay sex. In that ruling, the high court held
that homosexuals' "dignity as free persons" barred prosecution of their
private sexual conduct.
Atlanta lawyer Paula Frederick, a member of the House of Delegates,
said she supports the resolution.
"There are too many unwanted children out there who need loving
parents," she said.
"I think it's a wonderful thing for children to find two people
who'll love them and are willing to adopt them," she said.
An ABA task force report on the issue notes that many same-sex
parents try to protect their relationships with their children through legal
documents such as wills and guardian agreements. "But they do not create a
legally recognized parental relationship, and they are vastly inferior to
the security and legal protection that adoption provides for children."
Financial needs
Without adoption, the report noted, a child of one parent cannot
claim financial support or inheritance rights from the second parent; is not
entitled to Social Security, retirement or workers' compensation benefits
from the second parent; and is ineligible for health insurance benefits from
the second parent's employer.
Nationwide, eight states and the District of Columbia have either
passed laws or had appellate court rulings allowing a second gay parent to
join with an adoptive parent. Georgia is not among those states.
On Aug. 4, the California Supreme Court became the latest court to
guarantee the rights of gay couples to adopt children. Second-parent
adoption, the court said, can secure the benefits of "legally recognized
parentage for a child. . .who otherwise must remain a legal stranger."
The next key ruling is expected soon from the federal appeals court
in Atlanta, which is considering a challenge to a Florida law banning
adoption by any gay person.
The case hinges on whether the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals can
determine there was a reasonable rationale behind the Florida statute.
Florida inconsistent
In court filings, the state of Florida said it prefers to place
children in homes with both mothers and fathers and which are stabilized by
long-term marriage.
"In such homes, children have the best chance to develop optimally,
due to the vital role dual-gender parenting plays in shaping sexual and
gender identity and in providing heterosexual role modeling," the state
said.
It is also preferable to place a child in an adoptive home "which
minimizes social stigmatization to the extent possible," the state said.
"It is reasonably related to these interests to discourage adoption into
homosexual environments."
But the American Civil Liberties Union lawyers, which represents two
gay couples and a lesbian couple in the case, said Florida has allowed
couples with drug and alcohol problems or histories of domestic violence to
adopt children. Florida judges allow some gay couples to become permanent
legal guardians.
"Given the state's frank acknowledgement that lesbians and gay men
pose no risk of harm to children, and its willingness to place children with
lesbians and gay men permanently, it is impossible to credit the idea that
the ban was adopted to promote child welfare," the ACLU said.
"The only purpose the ban could possibly serve is the forbidden one:
expressing the state's disapproval of lesbians and gay men."
72 Marietta Street NW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
(Fax: 404-526-5746 ) (E-Mail: journal@ajc.com )
( http://www.accessatlanta.com )
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0803/11gayadopt.html
Lawyers consider gay adoption rights
By Bill Rankin, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
SAN FRANCISCO - While national debate simmers over the issue of
same-sex marriage, the nation's largest legal group today will consider the
rights of gay and lesbian couples to adopt children.
In a vote scheduled for today, the American Bar Association's
governing body will vote on a resolution that applies to unmarried couples
who are either heterosexual or gay. It calls on the 410,000-member lawyer
group to support state laws and court rulings that permit joint adoptions
and second-parent adoptions by unmarried people.
"Recognizing these relationships is an essential means of protecting
the core rights of children," said Washington lawyer Mark Agrast, chairman
of an ABA individual rights committee. "Every child should have a legally
recognized relationship to each parent."
The issue is before the lawyer group only weeks after the U.S.
Supreme Court decriminalized gay sex. In that ruling, the high court held
that homosexuals' "dignity as free persons" barred prosecution of their
private sexual conduct.
Atlanta lawyer Paula Frederick, a member of the House of Delegates,
said she supports the resolution.
"There are too many unwanted children out there who need loving
parents," she said.
"I think it's a wonderful thing for children to find two people
who'll love them and are willing to adopt them," she said.
An ABA task force report on the issue notes that many same-sex
parents try to protect their relationships with their children through legal
documents such as wills and guardian agreements. "But they do not create a
legally recognized parental relationship, and they are vastly inferior to
the security and legal protection that adoption provides for children."
Financial needs
Without adoption, the report noted, a child of one parent cannot
claim financial support or inheritance rights from the second parent; is not
entitled to Social Security, retirement or workers' compensation benefits
from the second parent; and is ineligible for health insurance benefits from
the second parent's employer.
Nationwide, eight states and the District of Columbia have either
passed laws or had appellate court rulings allowing a second gay parent to
join with an adoptive parent. Georgia is not among those states.
On Aug. 4, the California Supreme Court became the latest court to
guarantee the rights of gay couples to adopt children. Second-parent
adoption, the court said, can secure the benefits of "legally recognized
parentage for a child. . .who otherwise must remain a legal stranger."
The next key ruling is expected soon from the federal appeals court
in Atlanta, which is considering a challenge to a Florida law banning
adoption by any gay person.
The case hinges on whether the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals can
determine there was a reasonable rationale behind the Florida statute.
Florida inconsistent
In court filings, the state of Florida said it prefers to place
children in homes with both mothers and fathers and which are stabilized by
long-term marriage.
"In such homes, children have the best chance to develop optimally,
due to the vital role dual-gender parenting plays in shaping sexual and
gender identity and in providing heterosexual role modeling," the state
said.
It is also preferable to place a child in an adoptive home "which
minimizes social stigmatization to the extent possible," the state said.
"It is reasonably related to these interests to discourage adoption into
homosexual environments."
But the American Civil Liberties Union lawyers, which represents two
gay couples and a lesbian couple in the case, said Florida has allowed
couples with drug and alcohol problems or histories of domestic violence to
adopt children. Florida judges allow some gay couples to become permanent
legal guardians.
"Given the state's frank acknowledgement that lesbians and gay men
pose no risk of harm to children, and its willingness to place children with
lesbians and gay men permanently, it is impossible to credit the idea that
the ban was adopted to promote child welfare," the ACLU said.
"The only purpose the ban could possibly serve is the forbidden one:
expressing the state's disapproval of lesbians and gay men."
Opinion: Objection to Robinson not a smear, Tinseltown Minus the Tinsel, WASHINGTON POST: Down Low
1. NEWARK STAR-LEDGER (New Jersey) New Jersey Episcopalians confront the
gay-rights dispute; Reactions during Sunday services vary from sadness to
support
2. MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE Opinion: Objection to Robinson not a smear
3. WASHINGTON POST 'Gay Hollywood': Tinseltown Minus the Tinsel
4. WASHINGTON POST Down Low
Newark Star-Ledger, August 11, 2003
Star Ledger Plaza, Newark, NJ, 07101
(Fax: 201-643-7248 ) (E-Mail: eletters@starledger.com )
( http://www.nj.com/page1/ledger/ )
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1060576200195592
.xml
N.J. Episcopalians confront the gay-rights dispute
Reactions during Sunday services vary from sadness to support
By Judy Lucas and Maura McDermott, Star-Ledger Staff
On the first Sunday after leaders of the Episcopal Church voted to
confirm an openly gay bishop and declare blessings for same-sex unions
permissible, pastors and parishioners throughout New Jersey addressed the
controversial issues head-on during services yesterday.
At St. Michael's Episcopal Church in Wayne, the Rev. Ellen Donnelly
said she felt "sadness and dismay that the Church has definitively departed
from the Scripture which says that homosexuality is a sin."
From the pulpit, she asked parishioners yesterday for their feelings
on the votes.
"Disgust!" "Embarrassment!" "Betrayal!" "Confusion!" they shouted
back.
But at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Paterson, where in 1995 a
former pastor announced from the pulpit her homosexuality - she received a
standing ovation - there was widespread support for last week's decisions.
"It's a real milestone," the Rev. David Wolf, the rector, said of the
confirmation of the Rev. Canon V. Gene Robinson as bishop of the Diocese of
New Hampshire. "Here's a person (Robinson) that was elected and then
confirmed who's openly gay in a same-sex relationship. ... That will go
(far) toward changing people's hearts and minds."
The reactions yesterday reflected both sides of the gay-rights debate
that drew worldwide attention last week to the Episcopal General Convention
in Minneapolis, where church leaders confirmed Robinson and effectively
authorized priestly blessings of same-sex unions in dioceses where bishops
allow them.
At Trinity Episcopal Church in Woodbridge, the Rev. Robert Counselman
remained relatively neutral during his sermon.
"Only time alone will tell whether the actions of the General
Convention are the will of God," Counselman told his congregants. "We can
all still gather to worship God and still have different opinions about the
General Convention."
Those who support Robinson's confirmation said it will lead to a more
inclusive Episcopal Church, both in spirit and in numbers.
"Everyone is equal at God's table, so why not a gay bishop?" asked
Greg Luciano, a lay parish leader at St. Paul's in Paterson.
The Episcopal Church of the United States has 2.3 million members and
is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which has more than 70 million
members and whose parent church is the Church of England.
Church conservatives have threatened a schism over last week's
actions in Minneapolis. It is too soon to tell, however, whether the
threatened split will come to pass. Few church conservatives boycotted the
convention after the votes, but the American Anglican Council, which
represents the church's most conservative wing, plans an October meeting in
Texas to discuss a follow-up move.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the spiritual leader of the
Anglican Communion, called for a special meeting in October of Communion
leaders in London.
Yesterday, the Rev. Edgar Gutierrez-Duarte, assistant rector at St.
Paul's in Paterson, said his joy over Robinson's confirmation is balanced by
sadness that others in the church are so angry over it.
"I know many of us are celebrating, but many people are also
hurting," said Gutierrez-Duarte, who is openly gay. "It's a decision that
challenges the theology of many people ... I'm just praying that we will
keep talking about this rather than cutting dialogue."
Many conservatives, referring to Biblical passages that condemn
homosexuality, say the time for dialogue is past. The liberal wing of the
church already has imposed its will, they say.
"As Anglicans we are guided by three principles - the Bible,
tradition and human reason," said John Fleming of Christ Church in New
Brunswick. "The church has made a decision that is obviously contrary to
Christian tradition and in clear contradiction to Scripture.
"They made a decision that puts us at odds with the majority of
Anglicans," Fleming said during a chapel session after yesterday's service,
when 20 parishioners met to discuss the subject. "I think this is not a
question of whether it is going to split the church, it's how it's going to
split the church. The pursuit of unfettered sexual desire is chaos.
"The bishop is (supposed to be) the sign of unity in the church. Is
anybody going to tell me Bishop Robinson is a sign of unity in the church?"
Betty Heindlein, 91, a parishioner at Christ Church, opposes having a
gay bishop.
"I am trying to adapt to the changes around me," she said. "I need a
crutch. The tradition of the church was my cane, my walker."
Rosie Grant, 39, a member of St. Paul's in Paterson, said she hopes
the issue does not cause a split in the Episcopal Church. She supports
Robinson's election but said many in her family do not.
"I struggle with it, because a lot of my family doesn't believe that
gays and lesbians should have leadership roles within the church," Grant
said. "When I gather with my family, I'm in the minority.
"It's an area where sometimes we agree to disagree or enjoy a heated
debate," she said.
Deacon Liz Golub of St. Michael's in Wayne said she's sorry the
church has received so much attention over this one issue.
"It is really too bad this is becoming a defining feature of our
Church," she said. "We've lost our focus."
. Staff writers Dina Guirguis, Jacqueline Stasiuk and Jeff Diamant
contributed to this report.
Minneapolis Star Tribune, August 11, 2003
425 Portland Avenue, Minneapolis, MN, 55408
(Fax: 612-673-4359 ) (E-Mail: opinion@startribune.com )
( http://www.startribune.com/ )
http://www.startribune.com/stories/562/4032112.html
Objection to Robinson not a smear
Mark Tooley
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In an Aug. 6 editorial ("Robinson Ambush/The
Anatomy of a Smear"), the Star Tribune accused critics of the Episcopal
Church's first affirmed openly homosexual bishop of a "deliberate,
calculated lie." It cited concerns over Outright, a group the Rev. Gene
Robinson helped found.
Outright affirms homosexuality and bisexuality to youth ages 12 to
22. For traditional Christians, this is disturbing enough. Steering young
people toward behavior that is destructive (according to Jewish and
Christian teachings) is not a "ministry."
After Robinson touted Outright at the General Convention, it was
noticed that the group's Web site indirectly linked to pornography. The
editorial dismissively noted: "Everything on the Web is a few clicks away
from porn." Well, OK. But presumably Christian clergy, and the
organizations they promote, have a higher standard.
A quick Episcopal Church investigation decided Robinson had no ties
to the Outright Web site. But Robinson did champion a group that encourages
young people to pursue sexual practices upon which Christianity has
traditionally frowned. Not surprisingly, many Episcopalians were
distressed.
The editorial deduced a conspiracy. Weekly Standard editor Fred
Barnes, an Episcopalian, supposedly hyped the Web-site/porn association.
(Actually, the story became big only when reinforced by a charge against
Robinson of inappropriate touching by an Episcopalian. This matter was also
dismissed.)
According to the editorial, Barnes is conservative and serves on the
board of the Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD), for which I work.
And the IRD gets funding from conservative foundations. And some of those
foundations "bankrolled the Clinton wars." So Monica Lewinsky is connected
to Gene Robinson!
Well, here is the connection. The kinds of people who were
especially distressed about President Bill Clinton's behavior are also
likely to have qualms about a church leader who leaves his family to
cohabitate with a same-sex companion.
The IRD wants accountability in mainline churches. We believe
personal behavior is important to overall character. We thought President
Clinton should have resigned. And we think church leaders, even more than
politicians, should be above reproach.
But the editorial assumed baser motives. Our concerns about the
Outright Web site were "dirty tricks." And Robinson is "guilty of nothing
at all - save being a gay man who wants to be a bishop."
At issue here is not guilt. At issue are two different worldviews.
Mainstream Christians believe in the Bible's authoritative moral revelation
and specifically that sex is for heterosexual marriage.
The liberal parts of some churches, like our popular culture, believe
in fluid forms of truth and that sexual constraints should be governed only
by consent.
Most Christians are upset when their leaders ignore traditional
understandings about divine revelation. More liberal people are upset when
claims about divine revelation challenge modern concepts about tolerance.
This was the real struggle at the Episcopal General Convention.
Rather than ascribing sinister intent to one side in this debate, perhaps
the editorial could have forthrightly explained why it sympathized with the
other side.
. Mark Tooley is a research associate at the Washington-based
Institute on Religion and Democracy.
Washington Post, August 11, 2003
1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20071
(E-Mail: letterstoed@washpost.com )( http://washingtonpost.com/ )
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42040-2003Aug10.html
'Gay Hollywood': Tinseltown Minus the Tinsel
By Jennifer Frey, Washington Post Staff Writer
This is what you need to know about the first installment of "The AMC
Project," a new documentary series that purports to provide
thought-provoking viewpoints on life in Hollywood:
The title doesn't fit. "Gay Hollywood" isn't really about, well, gay
Hollywood. It's about five guys struggling to make it in La-La Land. Sure,
they're gay. But as Richard Day, executive producer for "Good Morning,
Miami," asks one of the five quizzically in the middle of one of the
seemingly endless pitch meetings featured in the film, "What about the gay
thing?"
Yeah, what about the gay thing? The premise of the documentary,
which is directed and produced by Jeremy Simmons and will air on AMC at 10
tonight, is to explore what it means to be gay in Hollywood by following
around five openly gay guys as they try to launch, or advance, their careers
in the fields of acting, directing and screenwriting. And while the work
the men choose to do is clearly informed by their sexual orientation - one
bases his comedy routine on his life as a drag queen, one writes and directs
a gay soft-core porn film, one is writing a screenplay about gay dads -
discussions of how that fits in Hollywood are few and far between.
And then there's the other problem: Most of these guys lead really,
really boring lives. Or at least that's the way it comes across. The only
aspect we see of their social existence is when the five of them get
together at someone's house to have cocktails and unilluminating
conversation. No one seems to be dating, or in a relationship. No one
seems to have outside interests.
The film, then, is about their work lives, and the sad truth is that
trying to make it in Hollywood can be tedious, tedious stuff. This is the
subject matter the director had to work with: guys sitting around, waiting
for the phone to ring. Guys "taking meetings" that involve painful,
critical dissections of their work (it's kind of like having to watch
someone else's performance review). Guys typing on their laptops.
Mostly, though, it's guys talking to the camera about what they wish
their lives were like.
Their names are Lance, Robert, Allan, Benjamin and Micah, but they
could really all be the same person, save for Micah, the drag queen, who
livens things up here and there (and always seems to be applying makeup).
As Lance himself puts it at the beginning of the film, "It's such a
polarized, singular vision of what it's like to be gay in Hollywood. It's
five blond guys. Well, whatever."
Exactly.
At the outset of the film, one of the characters declares Hollywood
"the gayest city in the world," and another admits that being cute sometimes
gets him meetings with established gay producers. And Lance frets a bit,
midshow, that being in this documentary (along with his previous work, which
includes writing and directing a gay-themed film) will label him as "the
gayest guy in Hollywood." But the only time the film seems to confront the
issue of potential discrimination comes at the end of the picture, when the
five guys, while appearing on a panel to promote their show, are asked by a
television critic whether they all aren't a little "too gay."
"What does that mean?" they start asking themselves, and each other,
as a flurry of worry - and a sense of being affronted - takes over for a few
minutes. The scene, though, already seems dated, coming at a time when a
show like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" is getting such popular buzz that
NBC chose to showcase the Bravo series with a special appearance in its
prized Thursday night lineup - right after its well-established, solidly
popular gay-themed show "Will & Grace."
In the end, what the film tells is that what it's like to be gay in
Hollywood is . . . common. And that's just not all that entertaining or -
in the end - informative.
Washington Post, August 11, 2003
1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20071
(E-Mail: letterstoed@washpost.com )( http://washingtonpost.com/ )
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43576-2003Aug11.html
Down Low
By Jabari Asim
WASHINGTON - "We can keep it on the down low. Nobody has to know," R.
Kelly once crooned in his trademark silky style. Kelly, an R&B superstar
best known these days for his indictment last year on child pornography
charges, scored a hit with a catchy ode to infidelity way back in 1995.
While the song may be nearly forgotten, its title - "Down Low" -
remains very much in vogue. In current lingo, it describes black men who
secretly engage in homosexual relationships while maintaining wives and
girlfriends. Last week, both The Washington Post and The New York Times
featured articles on the down low or "DL" lifestyle, which experts link to
the soaring rates of HIV infection among African-American women.
The Centers for Disease Control estimate that black women accounted
for nearly 64 percent of HIV cases among women in 2001. In 25 states with
long-standing HIV reporting, the rate of HIV infection among
African-American women ages 20 to 44 was four times higher than the rate
among Latina women of the same age, and more than 16 times higher than the
rate among white women. The leading cause of infection is heterosexual
contact, according to the CDC. In other words, there's a whole lotta
cheatin' goin' on.
The recent news coverage of men "on the DL" follows last month's
publication of a controversial new study of sexual habits in the Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. David P. Schmitt surveyed 16,288
volunteers - single, married and gay - from all around the globe. He found
that men on average said they wanted 5.95 sexual partners over the next 10
years. Women said they wanted 2.17.
The study has stirred up a long-standing debate among scientists.
Schmitt, an evolutionary psychologist at Bradley University, believes the
results help explain why men are more likely to be unfaithful. Promiscuity
may be hardwired, he contends, like physical characteristics we inherit from
our parents. Other scientists argue that the male inclination to sleep
around is learned behavior, reinforced by a culture that values sexual
experience in men.
Unfortunately such discussions don't shed much light on the
disquieting DL phenomenon. Neither culture nor biology can justify the
baffling behavior of black men who engage in unprotected sex with other men,
then go home to infect their wives and girlfriends. Obviously, black men
aren't the only males of the species living the DL life. But, as the
numbers show, the consequences have been far deadlier.
Some men on the DL celebrate it as an act of defiance that frees them
from the hidebound restrictions of society. Others see it as an inevitable
reaction to the homophobia often found in black communities. Both
perspectives fail to acknowledge that choosing to spread the risk of HIV
virus to unsuspecting mates is the moral equivalent of terrorism. Careless
jumping from partner to partner differs little from entering a crowded bus
with explosives strapped around your waist. It may take longer for your
victims to die, but you're blowing them up nonetheless.
However misguided their methods, suicide bombers have at least
deluded themselves into believing they act on behalf of a cause. Down low
men who carelessly spread disease can make no such claims. While homophobia
is loathsome and inexcusable, it is not a license to kill. Blaming personal
dishonesty and reckless behavior on anti-gay attitudes is like using racism
as an excuse to rape and steal: It simply doesn't make sense.
Men on the DL aren't the only members of black communities with an
apparent aversion to monogamy. To growing numbers of African-Americans,
personal responsibility has become an inconvenient notion that gets in the
way of getting one's groove on and "keepin' it real." Messages expressing
the need to practice safe sex and attend to the needs of our families have
not found receptive audiences, hindered in part by the contradictory example
of too many prominent black men.
Jesse Jackson has fathered a child out of wedlock. NAACP President
Kweisi Mfume fathered five children out of wedlock when he was a very young
man. NBA forward Shawn Kemp has fathered seven children out of wedlock.
The popular rapper known as Ol' Dirty Bastard has fathered 13 kids by "at
least six" women, according to a recent VH-1 documentary.
While heterosexual straying is not so closely linked to AIDS, it is
still cheating, and contributes just as much to the breakdown of
African-American families. In that sense, straight philanderers are as DL
as their secretly gay counterparts. Down low? Actually, low down is more
like it.
gay-rights dispute; Reactions during Sunday services vary from sadness to
support
2. MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE Opinion: Objection to Robinson not a smear
3. WASHINGTON POST 'Gay Hollywood': Tinseltown Minus the Tinsel
4. WASHINGTON POST Down Low
Newark Star-Ledger, August 11, 2003
Star Ledger Plaza, Newark, NJ, 07101
(Fax: 201-643-7248 ) (E-Mail: eletters@starledger.com )
( http://www.nj.com/page1/ledger/ )
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1060576200195592
.xml
N.J. Episcopalians confront the gay-rights dispute
Reactions during Sunday services vary from sadness to support
By Judy Lucas and Maura McDermott, Star-Ledger Staff
On the first Sunday after leaders of the Episcopal Church voted to
confirm an openly gay bishop and declare blessings for same-sex unions
permissible, pastors and parishioners throughout New Jersey addressed the
controversial issues head-on during services yesterday.
At St. Michael's Episcopal Church in Wayne, the Rev. Ellen Donnelly
said she felt "sadness and dismay that the Church has definitively departed
from the Scripture which says that homosexuality is a sin."
From the pulpit, she asked parishioners yesterday for their feelings
on the votes.
"Disgust!" "Embarrassment!" "Betrayal!" "Confusion!" they shouted
back.
But at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Paterson, where in 1995 a
former pastor announced from the pulpit her homosexuality - she received a
standing ovation - there was widespread support for last week's decisions.
"It's a real milestone," the Rev. David Wolf, the rector, said of the
confirmation of the Rev. Canon V. Gene Robinson as bishop of the Diocese of
New Hampshire. "Here's a person (Robinson) that was elected and then
confirmed who's openly gay in a same-sex relationship. ... That will go
(far) toward changing people's hearts and minds."
The reactions yesterday reflected both sides of the gay-rights debate
that drew worldwide attention last week to the Episcopal General Convention
in Minneapolis, where church leaders confirmed Robinson and effectively
authorized priestly blessings of same-sex unions in dioceses where bishops
allow them.
At Trinity Episcopal Church in Woodbridge, the Rev. Robert Counselman
remained relatively neutral during his sermon.
"Only time alone will tell whether the actions of the General
Convention are the will of God," Counselman told his congregants. "We can
all still gather to worship God and still have different opinions about the
General Convention."
Those who support Robinson's confirmation said it will lead to a more
inclusive Episcopal Church, both in spirit and in numbers.
"Everyone is equal at God's table, so why not a gay bishop?" asked
Greg Luciano, a lay parish leader at St. Paul's in Paterson.
The Episcopal Church of the United States has 2.3 million members and
is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which has more than 70 million
members and whose parent church is the Church of England.
Church conservatives have threatened a schism over last week's
actions in Minneapolis. It is too soon to tell, however, whether the
threatened split will come to pass. Few church conservatives boycotted the
convention after the votes, but the American Anglican Council, which
represents the church's most conservative wing, plans an October meeting in
Texas to discuss a follow-up move.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the spiritual leader of the
Anglican Communion, called for a special meeting in October of Communion
leaders in London.
Yesterday, the Rev. Edgar Gutierrez-Duarte, assistant rector at St.
Paul's in Paterson, said his joy over Robinson's confirmation is balanced by
sadness that others in the church are so angry over it.
"I know many of us are celebrating, but many people are also
hurting," said Gutierrez-Duarte, who is openly gay. "It's a decision that
challenges the theology of many people ... I'm just praying that we will
keep talking about this rather than cutting dialogue."
Many conservatives, referring to Biblical passages that condemn
homosexuality, say the time for dialogue is past. The liberal wing of the
church already has imposed its will, they say.
"As Anglicans we are guided by three principles - the Bible,
tradition and human reason," said John Fleming of Christ Church in New
Brunswick. "The church has made a decision that is obviously contrary to
Christian tradition and in clear contradiction to Scripture.
"They made a decision that puts us at odds with the majority of
Anglicans," Fleming said during a chapel session after yesterday's service,
when 20 parishioners met to discuss the subject. "I think this is not a
question of whether it is going to split the church, it's how it's going to
split the church. The pursuit of unfettered sexual desire is chaos.
"The bishop is (supposed to be) the sign of unity in the church. Is
anybody going to tell me Bishop Robinson is a sign of unity in the church?"
Betty Heindlein, 91, a parishioner at Christ Church, opposes having a
gay bishop.
"I am trying to adapt to the changes around me," she said. "I need a
crutch. The tradition of the church was my cane, my walker."
Rosie Grant, 39, a member of St. Paul's in Paterson, said she hopes
the issue does not cause a split in the Episcopal Church. She supports
Robinson's election but said many in her family do not.
"I struggle with it, because a lot of my family doesn't believe that
gays and lesbians should have leadership roles within the church," Grant
said. "When I gather with my family, I'm in the minority.
"It's an area where sometimes we agree to disagree or enjoy a heated
debate," she said.
Deacon Liz Golub of St. Michael's in Wayne said she's sorry the
church has received so much attention over this one issue.
"It is really too bad this is becoming a defining feature of our
Church," she said. "We've lost our focus."
. Staff writers Dina Guirguis, Jacqueline Stasiuk and Jeff Diamant
contributed to this report.
Minneapolis Star Tribune, August 11, 2003
425 Portland Avenue, Minneapolis, MN, 55408
(Fax: 612-673-4359 ) (E-Mail: opinion@startribune.com )
( http://www.startribune.com/ )
http://www.startribune.com/stories/562/4032112.html
Objection to Robinson not a smear
Mark Tooley
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In an Aug. 6 editorial ("Robinson Ambush/The
Anatomy of a Smear"), the Star Tribune accused critics of the Episcopal
Church's first affirmed openly homosexual bishop of a "deliberate,
calculated lie." It cited concerns over Outright, a group the Rev. Gene
Robinson helped found.
Outright affirms homosexuality and bisexuality to youth ages 12 to
22. For traditional Christians, this is disturbing enough. Steering young
people toward behavior that is destructive (according to Jewish and
Christian teachings) is not a "ministry."
After Robinson touted Outright at the General Convention, it was
noticed that the group's Web site indirectly linked to pornography. The
editorial dismissively noted: "Everything on the Web is a few clicks away
from porn." Well, OK. But presumably Christian clergy, and the
organizations they promote, have a higher standard.
A quick Episcopal Church investigation decided Robinson had no ties
to the Outright Web site. But Robinson did champion a group that encourages
young people to pursue sexual practices upon which Christianity has
traditionally frowned. Not surprisingly, many Episcopalians were
distressed.
The editorial deduced a conspiracy. Weekly Standard editor Fred
Barnes, an Episcopalian, supposedly hyped the Web-site/porn association.
(Actually, the story became big only when reinforced by a charge against
Robinson of inappropriate touching by an Episcopalian. This matter was also
dismissed.)
According to the editorial, Barnes is conservative and serves on the
board of the Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD), for which I work.
And the IRD gets funding from conservative foundations. And some of those
foundations "bankrolled the Clinton wars." So Monica Lewinsky is connected
to Gene Robinson!
Well, here is the connection. The kinds of people who were
especially distressed about President Bill Clinton's behavior are also
likely to have qualms about a church leader who leaves his family to
cohabitate with a same-sex companion.
The IRD wants accountability in mainline churches. We believe
personal behavior is important to overall character. We thought President
Clinton should have resigned. And we think church leaders, even more than
politicians, should be above reproach.
But the editorial assumed baser motives. Our concerns about the
Outright Web site were "dirty tricks." And Robinson is "guilty of nothing
at all - save being a gay man who wants to be a bishop."
At issue here is not guilt. At issue are two different worldviews.
Mainstream Christians believe in the Bible's authoritative moral revelation
and specifically that sex is for heterosexual marriage.
The liberal parts of some churches, like our popular culture, believe
in fluid forms of truth and that sexual constraints should be governed only
by consent.
Most Christians are upset when their leaders ignore traditional
understandings about divine revelation. More liberal people are upset when
claims about divine revelation challenge modern concepts about tolerance.
This was the real struggle at the Episcopal General Convention.
Rather than ascribing sinister intent to one side in this debate, perhaps
the editorial could have forthrightly explained why it sympathized with the
other side.
. Mark Tooley is a research associate at the Washington-based
Institute on Religion and Democracy.
Washington Post, August 11, 2003
1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20071
(E-Mail: letterstoed@washpost.com )( http://washingtonpost.com/ )
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42040-2003Aug10.html
'Gay Hollywood': Tinseltown Minus the Tinsel
By Jennifer Frey, Washington Post Staff Writer
This is what you need to know about the first installment of "The AMC
Project," a new documentary series that purports to provide
thought-provoking viewpoints on life in Hollywood:
The title doesn't fit. "Gay Hollywood" isn't really about, well, gay
Hollywood. It's about five guys struggling to make it in La-La Land. Sure,
they're gay. But as Richard Day, executive producer for "Good Morning,
Miami," asks one of the five quizzically in the middle of one of the
seemingly endless pitch meetings featured in the film, "What about the gay
thing?"
Yeah, what about the gay thing? The premise of the documentary,
which is directed and produced by Jeremy Simmons and will air on AMC at 10
tonight, is to explore what it means to be gay in Hollywood by following
around five openly gay guys as they try to launch, or advance, their careers
in the fields of acting, directing and screenwriting. And while the work
the men choose to do is clearly informed by their sexual orientation - one
bases his comedy routine on his life as a drag queen, one writes and directs
a gay soft-core porn film, one is writing a screenplay about gay dads -
discussions of how that fits in Hollywood are few and far between.
And then there's the other problem: Most of these guys lead really,
really boring lives. Or at least that's the way it comes across. The only
aspect we see of their social existence is when the five of them get
together at someone's house to have cocktails and unilluminating
conversation. No one seems to be dating, or in a relationship. No one
seems to have outside interests.
The film, then, is about their work lives, and the sad truth is that
trying to make it in Hollywood can be tedious, tedious stuff. This is the
subject matter the director had to work with: guys sitting around, waiting
for the phone to ring. Guys "taking meetings" that involve painful,
critical dissections of their work (it's kind of like having to watch
someone else's performance review). Guys typing on their laptops.
Mostly, though, it's guys talking to the camera about what they wish
their lives were like.
Their names are Lance, Robert, Allan, Benjamin and Micah, but they
could really all be the same person, save for Micah, the drag queen, who
livens things up here and there (and always seems to be applying makeup).
As Lance himself puts it at the beginning of the film, "It's such a
polarized, singular vision of what it's like to be gay in Hollywood. It's
five blond guys. Well, whatever."
Exactly.
At the outset of the film, one of the characters declares Hollywood
"the gayest city in the world," and another admits that being cute sometimes
gets him meetings with established gay producers. And Lance frets a bit,
midshow, that being in this documentary (along with his previous work, which
includes writing and directing a gay-themed film) will label him as "the
gayest guy in Hollywood." But the only time the film seems to confront the
issue of potential discrimination comes at the end of the picture, when the
five guys, while appearing on a panel to promote their show, are asked by a
television critic whether they all aren't a little "too gay."
"What does that mean?" they start asking themselves, and each other,
as a flurry of worry - and a sense of being affronted - takes over for a few
minutes. The scene, though, already seems dated, coming at a time when a
show like "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" is getting such popular buzz that
NBC chose to showcase the Bravo series with a special appearance in its
prized Thursday night lineup - right after its well-established, solidly
popular gay-themed show "Will & Grace."
In the end, what the film tells is that what it's like to be gay in
Hollywood is . . . common. And that's just not all that entertaining or -
in the end - informative.
Washington Post, August 11, 2003
1150 15th Street NW, Washington, DC, 20071
(E-Mail: letterstoed@washpost.com )( http://washingtonpost.com/ )
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43576-2003Aug11.html
Down Low
By Jabari Asim
WASHINGTON - "We can keep it on the down low. Nobody has to know," R.
Kelly once crooned in his trademark silky style. Kelly, an R&B superstar
best known these days for his indictment last year on child pornography
charges, scored a hit with a catchy ode to infidelity way back in 1995.
While the song may be nearly forgotten, its title - "Down Low" -
remains very much in vogue. In current lingo, it describes black men who
secretly engage in homosexual relationships while maintaining wives and
girlfriends. Last week, both The Washington Post and The New York Times
featured articles on the down low or "DL" lifestyle, which experts link to
the soaring rates of HIV infection among African-American women.
The Centers for Disease Control estimate that black women accounted
for nearly 64 percent of HIV cases among women in 2001. In 25 states with
long-standing HIV reporting, the rate of HIV infection among
African-American women ages 20 to 44 was four times higher than the rate
among Latina women of the same age, and more than 16 times higher than the
rate among white women. The leading cause of infection is heterosexual
contact, according to the CDC. In other words, there's a whole lotta
cheatin' goin' on.
The recent news coverage of men "on the DL" follows last month's
publication of a controversial new study of sexual habits in the Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. David P. Schmitt surveyed 16,288
volunteers - single, married and gay - from all around the globe. He found
that men on average said they wanted 5.95 sexual partners over the next 10
years. Women said they wanted 2.17.
The study has stirred up a long-standing debate among scientists.
Schmitt, an evolutionary psychologist at Bradley University, believes the
results help explain why men are more likely to be unfaithful. Promiscuity
may be hardwired, he contends, like physical characteristics we inherit from
our parents. Other scientists argue that the male inclination to sleep
around is learned behavior, reinforced by a culture that values sexual
experience in men.
Unfortunately such discussions don't shed much light on the
disquieting DL phenomenon. Neither culture nor biology can justify the
baffling behavior of black men who engage in unprotected sex with other men,
then go home to infect their wives and girlfriends. Obviously, black men
aren't the only males of the species living the DL life. But, as the
numbers show, the consequences have been far deadlier.
Some men on the DL celebrate it as an act of defiance that frees them
from the hidebound restrictions of society. Others see it as an inevitable
reaction to the homophobia often found in black communities. Both
perspectives fail to acknowledge that choosing to spread the risk of HIV
virus to unsuspecting mates is the moral equivalent of terrorism. Careless
jumping from partner to partner differs little from entering a crowded bus
with explosives strapped around your waist. It may take longer for your
victims to die, but you're blowing them up nonetheless.
However misguided their methods, suicide bombers have at least
deluded themselves into believing they act on behalf of a cause. Down low
men who carelessly spread disease can make no such claims. While homophobia
is loathsome and inexcusable, it is not a license to kill. Blaming personal
dishonesty and reckless behavior on anti-gay attitudes is like using racism
as an excuse to rape and steal: It simply doesn't make sense.
Men on the DL aren't the only members of black communities with an
apparent aversion to monogamy. To growing numbers of African-Americans,
personal responsibility has become an inconvenient notion that gets in the
way of getting one's groove on and "keepin' it real." Messages expressing
the need to practice safe sex and attend to the needs of our families have
not found receptive audiences, hindered in part by the contradictory example
of too many prominent black men.
Jesse Jackson has fathered a child out of wedlock. NAACP President
Kweisi Mfume fathered five children out of wedlock when he was a very young
man. NBA forward Shawn Kemp has fathered seven children out of wedlock.
The popular rapper known as Ol' Dirty Bastard has fathered 13 kids by "at
least six" women, according to a recent VH-1 documentary.
While heterosexual straying is not so closely linked to AIDS, it is
still cheating, and contributes just as much to the breakdown of
African-American families. In that sense, straight philanderers are as DL
as their secretly gay counterparts. Down low? Actually, low down is more
like it.
Will the Episcopal Church find a way to survive? Definition of marriage is drawing new attention
1. TIME A House Divided: Will the Episcopal Church find a way to survive
the controversial election of its first openly gay bishop?
2. SACRAMENTO BEE Definition of marriage is drawing new attention
TIME, August 18, 2003
Time & Life Bldg.-Rockefeller Ctr., New York, NY, 10020
(Fax: 212-522-0601 ) (EMail: letters@time.com )
( http://www.time.com/time )
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030818-474566,00.html
A House Divided
Will the Episcopal Church find a way to survive the controversial election
of its first openly gay bishop?
By Claudia Wallis
For many of his 28 years as an Episcopal priest in New Hampshire, V.
Gene Robinson has specialized in helping congregations and clergy grapple
with painful conflicts. So perhaps it was divine destiny that Robinson
would become the focus of the biggest and most painful conflict to afflict
the Episcopal Church in decades - one that threatens the very integrity of
the 2.3 million-member U.S. denomination and the 70 million-member worldwide
Anglican Communion to which it belongs. Robinson seems to see his role in
terms of a divine plan: 17 years ago, "I answered God's call to acknowledge
myself as a gay man," he has explained. "Now God seems to be calling me to
another journey."
That journey officially began last week, when Robinson, 56, became
the first actively gay person to be approved as an Episcopal bishop. On the
evening of Aug. 5, 62 of 107 bishops convening in Minneapolis, Minn., voted
to support the canon, a divorced father of two grown daughters who has lived
openly with another man for 13 years. The vote, which confirmed Robinson's
earlier selection by the New Hampshire diocese, came just hours after he was
cleared of last-minute charges of sexual misconduct.
Within moments of Robinson's confirmation, a quiet but furious storm
began to shake the denomination. A procession of about a dozen grim-faced
bishops admonished the assemblage. "With grief too deep for words, the
bishops who stand before you must reject this action," intoned Bishop Robert
Duncan of Pittsburgh, Pa. "May God have mercy on his church." That
evening, while Bishop-elect Robinson met briefly with the press to pronounce
it "a very good day," members of the conservative American Anglican Council
(AAC) held a press conference of their own in a nearby Lutheran church to
announce their dismay and allude to plans for a possible rift.
"We consider Gene Robinson's election invalid, null and void," AAC
leader David Anderson later told TIME. "When those 62 bishops voted, there
was a shattering of the Episcopal Church as we know it. The structural
disengagement of the church has begun."
Conservatives were further inflamed on Thursday when the bishops in
Minneapolis addressed the controversial practice of blessing same-sex
unions, which is permitted in some dioceses and banned in others. Although
the bishops rejected a movement to write a formal liturgy for such
ceremonies, they officially affirmed that such rites are "an acceptable
practice within the church" and recognized that some parishes had already
begun to "explore and experience" liturgies for gay unions. On Friday, the
final day of the meeting, the AAC announced it would formally seek to create
a new and separate Episcopal province in the U.S. The group plans to meet
in Plano, Texas, in October to discuss the matter. Anderson denied that the
group was splitting from the church. Rather, he told the New York Times,
"they have split from us."
Conservative prelates in far-flung corners of the Anglican Communion,
which consists of 38 independent provinces around the world, felt the same
way. Response to Robinson's appointment from church leaders in Africa and
Asia, the fastest-growing areas of Anglicanism, was especially swift and
stern. "We cannot be in fellowship with them when they violate the explicit
Scripture that the Anglican Church subscribes to," said Peter Karanja,
provost of the All Saints Cathedral Church in Nairobi, Kenya. "It's
outrageous and uncalled for." Bishop Lim Cheng Ean, leader of the Anglican
Church of West Malaysia, was only a bit less blunt: "Practicing
homosexuality is culturally and legally not acceptable here." He indicated
that the bishops in the nine-nation Southeast Asian province may consider
severing relations with the U.S. church when they meet this week.
The delicate task of keeping peace within the worldwide communion
will fall to its spiritual leader, Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.
Though the Archbishop does not have the authority of a Pope, he is primus
inter pares. Williams narrowly evaded a rift over a gay but celibate bishop
on his home turf in July, when that bishop-appointee, after meeting with the
Archbishop for six hours, declined the office, citing concerns about church
unity.
The Archbishop cannot talk the American church out of a done deal,
but he may be able to broker a peace plan. Anglicans officially declared
homosexuality to be "incompatible with Scripture" at their most recent
Lambeth Conference - a once-a-decade meeting of the world's Anglican
bishops - in 1998. Still, dioceses have traditionally been granted generous
latitude in deciding their local practices. Archbishop Williams announced
last Friday an emergency meeting of the 38 primates from around the world to
consider the actions of the U.S. church. "I hope," he said in an official
statement, "we will find that there are ways forward in this situation which
can preserve our respect for one another and for the bonds that unite us."
Such a meeting of the church's leaders on a single, urgent topic is
"very, very rare," says the Rev. J. Robert Wright, official historiographer
of the Episcopal Church. "To my knowledge it has never been done before."
Other Protestant churches are carefully watching developments in the
Episcopal Church. "In the past the struggle around homosexuality in one
denomination has presented a template for the struggle in other churches,"
says the Rev. Eileen Lindner, a historian with the National Council of
Churches. Lindner points out that Presbyterians, United Methodists and
Evangelical Lutherans all have "substantial, active, gay faithful caucuses"
that now will push to re-examine the question of gay clergy. In fact,
Reverend Wright, who escorted "ecumenical observers" from other churches at
last week's conference, said the prevailing view was that "a logjam had been
broken."
Scholars feel that mainline U.S. Protestantism has been on a long,
anguished but inevitable path toward completely including homosexuals.
"Many people say, well, it's a matter of time," says Lamin Sanneh, professor
of religious history at Yale. But fast-growing churches in the Third World
and evangelicals are unlikely to follow this path. Some Protestants, he
says, take their cue from evolving "cultural standards," others from set
ideas about Scripture and tradition. For the Anglicans, it will take a
considerable leap of faith to bridge the divide.
. Reported by Simon Crittle/Concord, N.H., and Marguerite
Michaels/Minneapolis
Sacramento Bee, August 10, 2003
P. O. Box 15779, Sacramento, CA, 95813
(Fax: 916-321-1109 ) (E-Mail: opinion@sacbee.com )
( http://www.sacbee.com )
Definition of marriage drawing new attention
By Dorothy Korber, Bee Staff Writer
Alternately exhilarated and pragmatic, a Sacramento couple are
planning their September wedding. They'll stay at a romantic inn, they'll
invite a dear old aunt, they'll vow to love and care for each other until
death parts them.
And they'll hold the ceremony in British Columbia, where Laurie
McBride and Donna Yutzy - and other same-sex couples - may now legally wed.
"Even though it means getting married in exile, Canada is offering us
full, unconditional marriage," McBride said. "We won't settle for less."
Marriage - with all its legal, social and religious nuances - is
under new scrutiny as gay and lesbian couples press for the right to marry
in the United States. They argue it is a matter of equal treatment under
the law, a right they want even if they don't choose to exercise it.
Social and religious conservatives say same-sex marriage is not
marriage at all. They describe their battle against it as nothing less than
a last-ditch fight for community morality.
Americans are deeply polarized on the issue, with recent surveys
finding that a slim majority opposes same-sex marriage. The intensity of
the opposition has dwindled over time, according to the Pew Research Center,
with 30 percent of Americans now strongly opposed to gay marriage, down from
41 percent in 1996.
Change is in the wind, gay activists contend. They cite Canada's
example and the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision June 26 that
overturned state anti-sodomy laws. State courts in Massachusetts and New
Jersey are expected to rule on the legality of same-sex marriage in the next
few months.
"It's a great time to be queer," said Shelly Bailes of Davis, who
heads the local chapter of Marriage Equality California with her partner,
Ellen Pontac. "You never know what's around the corner."
McBride and Yutzy, who share McBride's childhood home in Land Park,
have embraced every chance to declare themselves a legal couple. They are
registered as domestic partners in California. In 2000, they journeyed to
Vermont so their relationship could be declared a "civil union" by a judge
there.
But this trip to Canada marks something different.
"After 18 years together, this is finally the real thing," Yutzy
exulted. "This is it. This is marriage."
Not according to the Vatican, which stated last month that "legal
recognition of homosexual unions" would obscure basic human values. Or
according to President Bush, who said July 30 that he believes in the
sanctity of marriage "between a man and a woman."
And not according to "Defense of Marriage" laws in California and 36
other states, which codify marriage strictly as a relationship between one
man and one woman. A similar definition of marriage was signed into federal
law by President Clinton in 1996.
What is marriage, exactly? Is it a ritual pronouncing a couple
husband and wife? An economic contract for sharing property? A social
agreement for rearing children? A declaration of love made before the
community?
Yes. Academics who study human culture say marriage is all of these
things.
"There's been a lot of debate among anthropologists whether marriage
is universal or not," said Monique Borgerhoff-Mulder, a professor in that
field at the University of California, Davis. "It depends on the definition
of marriage. In every society we know of, there are some kinds of bonds
between men and women - but not necessarily one man and one woman.
"More germane is what the bond is all about. Marriage can be a bond
for sexual reasons, economic reasons or reproductive reasons. Different
societies emphasize different reasons."
The reasons also vary from couple to couple, said Greg Herek, a UC
Davis social psychologist who studies sexual prejudice.
"Why marriage is important is a different story for each couple,"
Herek said. "For some, it boils down to practical issues of money and taxes
and legal status. For others, it boils down to having their relationship
recognized by their religious community."
Herek said there's historical evidence of commitment ceremonies for
male couples in the early Christian church. "Our notion of what is
homosexual versus heterosexual doesn't exist in every culture," he said.
The one-man/one-woman definition has been the law in Canada - but in
June provincial courts in Ontario and British Columbia ruled it
discriminatory and unconstitutional. As a result, American gay and lesbian
couples are pouring across the border, aiming to wed in Canada and return
home to challenge marriage laws here.
"We've never had a chance to challenge those laws before, but now,
thanks to Canada, we can," said Molly McKay, executive director of Marriage
Equality California, a statewide organization pushing for same-sex marriage.
"The legal point is straightforward. The United States recognizes other
Canadian marriages - so why not marriages of gays and lesbians?
"This is the civil rights issue of our time. We want to be able to
marry, and we want to call it marriage. Domestic partnership is not the
same - it's a stigma placed on gay people, saying 'your love is different.'
People don't write love songs about being domestic partnered."
Still, she said, domestic partnerships have been an important step
toward equality. Since California first established them in 1999, domestic
partnerships have gradually been expanded to include many parental, personal
and property rights formerly limited to married couples.
If signed into law this year, a broad new bill - AB 205 - would bring
most of the legal protections and responsibilities of marriage to
California's domestic partners. But, as a state law, it cannot confer
federal benefits such as citizenship for a foreign spouse or Social Security
for a surviving partner.
Sitting at their dining table on a quiet summer evening, McBride and
Yutzy agreed that they want it all - all the federal, state and social
benefits that married heterosexuals enjoy, as well as day-to-day recognition
that they are a legitimate couple.
The legal ramifications of a Canadian wedding are unclear, they
acknowledge, but they plan to identify themselves as a married couple on
federal income tax forms and other official documents.
"We're going to test the heck out of it," said Yutzy, 51, a
health-service planner who commutes to a job in Oregon.
"Our agenda is equality," said McBride, 54, who heads up special
programs in the California secretary of state's office. "But I want to make
a really important point. We're talking about marriage as a civil
contract - not a religious sacrament. We're not forcing any church to marry
same-sex couples. That's not something you can legislate."
But many denominations see the issue as more than a difference of
opinion over religious dogma - they're fighting the concept of same-sex
marriage as morally wrong.
That's also how Pat O'Dea sees it. A retired correctional officer
who lives in North Highlands, O'Dea said that marriage cannot be taken out
of its religious context.
"I really don't care what other people do in private," said O'Dea,
who is 44. "But I do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Period. A lot of the foundations of this country were based on religious
belief - including the nature of marriage.
"On the legal front, if they want to call it a partnership, like a
business relationship, I don't have a problem with that. But if you call it
marriage, and it's two men or two women, that's just not right."
O'Dea blames television and movies for making the public more
accepting of gay and lesbian relationships. "People used to be shocked by
this kind of thing," he said, "but now they've become desensitized to it.
It's like anything goes today. But the Bible says homosexuality is wrong."
There's no point in arguing with such a strongly held personal
viewpoint, said McKay of Marriage Equality California.
"It's civil marriage we're after, not religious," she said. "Our
country is run by the U.S. Constitution, not by the Bible."
If same-sex marriage is legalized in the United States, not all gays
and lesbians will be lining up for marriage licenses. Some, like many
heterosexuals, simply prefer to be single. Others object to participating
in a system they say has a long history of subjugating women.
In her book "The Wedding Complex," Elizabeth Freeman expresses the
wish that there was no such thing as legal marriage, period. In an ideal
world, the UC Davis English professor writes, the state would stop defining
kinship and instead provide universally for basic needs.
"I think there are lots of lesbians and gays who have put same-sex
marriage at the center of their agenda," Freeman said in an interview. "But
a number, who wouldn't work against it, don't consider it to be a critical
reform compared to health care or support to gay and lesbian youth."
Freeman, who is a lesbian, said she respects the wish to be married.
"One set of reasons is for safety and protection," she said.
"Another is the cultural wish to have a relationship that is intelligible to
the rest of one's family. That's an honorable wish, but not one I share."
For McBride and Yutzy, the public pronouncement of their abiding love
is key. So is the rite that proclaims it.
They realized the importance of the public ritual during their civil
union ceremony in Vermont.
"We didn't expect the ceremony to be emotional," Yutzy said. "But
when the judge said, 'Now, by the power vested in me,' we were overwhelmed.
It wasn't just us having our own little ceremony because no one else would
do it. This was real."
. About the Writer: The Bee's Dorothy Korber can be reached at (916)
321-1061 or dkorber@sacbee.com.
the controversial election of its first openly gay bishop?
2. SACRAMENTO BEE Definition of marriage is drawing new attention
TIME, August 18, 2003
Time & Life Bldg.-Rockefeller Ctr., New York, NY, 10020
(Fax: 212-522-0601 ) (EMail: letters@time.com )
( http://www.time.com/time )
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030818-474566,00.html
A House Divided
Will the Episcopal Church find a way to survive the controversial election
of its first openly gay bishop?
By Claudia Wallis
For many of his 28 years as an Episcopal priest in New Hampshire, V.
Gene Robinson has specialized in helping congregations and clergy grapple
with painful conflicts. So perhaps it was divine destiny that Robinson
would become the focus of the biggest and most painful conflict to afflict
the Episcopal Church in decades - one that threatens the very integrity of
the 2.3 million-member U.S. denomination and the 70 million-member worldwide
Anglican Communion to which it belongs. Robinson seems to see his role in
terms of a divine plan: 17 years ago, "I answered God's call to acknowledge
myself as a gay man," he has explained. "Now God seems to be calling me to
another journey."
That journey officially began last week, when Robinson, 56, became
the first actively gay person to be approved as an Episcopal bishop. On the
evening of Aug. 5, 62 of 107 bishops convening in Minneapolis, Minn., voted
to support the canon, a divorced father of two grown daughters who has lived
openly with another man for 13 years. The vote, which confirmed Robinson's
earlier selection by the New Hampshire diocese, came just hours after he was
cleared of last-minute charges of sexual misconduct.
Within moments of Robinson's confirmation, a quiet but furious storm
began to shake the denomination. A procession of about a dozen grim-faced
bishops admonished the assemblage. "With grief too deep for words, the
bishops who stand before you must reject this action," intoned Bishop Robert
Duncan of Pittsburgh, Pa. "May God have mercy on his church." That
evening, while Bishop-elect Robinson met briefly with the press to pronounce
it "a very good day," members of the conservative American Anglican Council
(AAC) held a press conference of their own in a nearby Lutheran church to
announce their dismay and allude to plans for a possible rift.
"We consider Gene Robinson's election invalid, null and void," AAC
leader David Anderson later told TIME. "When those 62 bishops voted, there
was a shattering of the Episcopal Church as we know it. The structural
disengagement of the church has begun."
Conservatives were further inflamed on Thursday when the bishops in
Minneapolis addressed the controversial practice of blessing same-sex
unions, which is permitted in some dioceses and banned in others. Although
the bishops rejected a movement to write a formal liturgy for such
ceremonies, they officially affirmed that such rites are "an acceptable
practice within the church" and recognized that some parishes had already
begun to "explore and experience" liturgies for gay unions. On Friday, the
final day of the meeting, the AAC announced it would formally seek to create
a new and separate Episcopal province in the U.S. The group plans to meet
in Plano, Texas, in October to discuss the matter. Anderson denied that the
group was splitting from the church. Rather, he told the New York Times,
"they have split from us."
Conservative prelates in far-flung corners of the Anglican Communion,
which consists of 38 independent provinces around the world, felt the same
way. Response to Robinson's appointment from church leaders in Africa and
Asia, the fastest-growing areas of Anglicanism, was especially swift and
stern. "We cannot be in fellowship with them when they violate the explicit
Scripture that the Anglican Church subscribes to," said Peter Karanja,
provost of the All Saints Cathedral Church in Nairobi, Kenya. "It's
outrageous and uncalled for." Bishop Lim Cheng Ean, leader of the Anglican
Church of West Malaysia, was only a bit less blunt: "Practicing
homosexuality is culturally and legally not acceptable here." He indicated
that the bishops in the nine-nation Southeast Asian province may consider
severing relations with the U.S. church when they meet this week.
The delicate task of keeping peace within the worldwide communion
will fall to its spiritual leader, Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.
Though the Archbishop does not have the authority of a Pope, he is primus
inter pares. Williams narrowly evaded a rift over a gay but celibate bishop
on his home turf in July, when that bishop-appointee, after meeting with the
Archbishop for six hours, declined the office, citing concerns about church
unity.
The Archbishop cannot talk the American church out of a done deal,
but he may be able to broker a peace plan. Anglicans officially declared
homosexuality to be "incompatible with Scripture" at their most recent
Lambeth Conference - a once-a-decade meeting of the world's Anglican
bishops - in 1998. Still, dioceses have traditionally been granted generous
latitude in deciding their local practices. Archbishop Williams announced
last Friday an emergency meeting of the 38 primates from around the world to
consider the actions of the U.S. church. "I hope," he said in an official
statement, "we will find that there are ways forward in this situation which
can preserve our respect for one another and for the bonds that unite us."
Such a meeting of the church's leaders on a single, urgent topic is
"very, very rare," says the Rev. J. Robert Wright, official historiographer
of the Episcopal Church. "To my knowledge it has never been done before."
Other Protestant churches are carefully watching developments in the
Episcopal Church. "In the past the struggle around homosexuality in one
denomination has presented a template for the struggle in other churches,"
says the Rev. Eileen Lindner, a historian with the National Council of
Churches. Lindner points out that Presbyterians, United Methodists and
Evangelical Lutherans all have "substantial, active, gay faithful caucuses"
that now will push to re-examine the question of gay clergy. In fact,
Reverend Wright, who escorted "ecumenical observers" from other churches at
last week's conference, said the prevailing view was that "a logjam had been
broken."
Scholars feel that mainline U.S. Protestantism has been on a long,
anguished but inevitable path toward completely including homosexuals.
"Many people say, well, it's a matter of time," says Lamin Sanneh, professor
of religious history at Yale. But fast-growing churches in the Third World
and evangelicals are unlikely to follow this path. Some Protestants, he
says, take their cue from evolving "cultural standards," others from set
ideas about Scripture and tradition. For the Anglicans, it will take a
considerable leap of faith to bridge the divide.
. Reported by Simon Crittle/Concord, N.H., and Marguerite
Michaels/Minneapolis
Sacramento Bee, August 10, 2003
P. O. Box 15779, Sacramento, CA, 95813
(Fax: 916-321-1109 ) (E-Mail: opinion@sacbee.com )
( http://www.sacbee.com )
Definition of marriage drawing new attention
By Dorothy Korber, Bee Staff Writer
Alternately exhilarated and pragmatic, a Sacramento couple are
planning their September wedding. They'll stay at a romantic inn, they'll
invite a dear old aunt, they'll vow to love and care for each other until
death parts them.
And they'll hold the ceremony in British Columbia, where Laurie
McBride and Donna Yutzy - and other same-sex couples - may now legally wed.
"Even though it means getting married in exile, Canada is offering us
full, unconditional marriage," McBride said. "We won't settle for less."
Marriage - with all its legal, social and religious nuances - is
under new scrutiny as gay and lesbian couples press for the right to marry
in the United States. They argue it is a matter of equal treatment under
the law, a right they want even if they don't choose to exercise it.
Social and religious conservatives say same-sex marriage is not
marriage at all. They describe their battle against it as nothing less than
a last-ditch fight for community morality.
Americans are deeply polarized on the issue, with recent surveys
finding that a slim majority opposes same-sex marriage. The intensity of
the opposition has dwindled over time, according to the Pew Research Center,
with 30 percent of Americans now strongly opposed to gay marriage, down from
41 percent in 1996.
Change is in the wind, gay activists contend. They cite Canada's
example and the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision June 26 that
overturned state anti-sodomy laws. State courts in Massachusetts and New
Jersey are expected to rule on the legality of same-sex marriage in the next
few months.
"It's a great time to be queer," said Shelly Bailes of Davis, who
heads the local chapter of Marriage Equality California with her partner,
Ellen Pontac. "You never know what's around the corner."
McBride and Yutzy, who share McBride's childhood home in Land Park,
have embraced every chance to declare themselves a legal couple. They are
registered as domestic partners in California. In 2000, they journeyed to
Vermont so their relationship could be declared a "civil union" by a judge
there.
But this trip to Canada marks something different.
"After 18 years together, this is finally the real thing," Yutzy
exulted. "This is it. This is marriage."
Not according to the Vatican, which stated last month that "legal
recognition of homosexual unions" would obscure basic human values. Or
according to President Bush, who said July 30 that he believes in the
sanctity of marriage "between a man and a woman."
And not according to "Defense of Marriage" laws in California and 36
other states, which codify marriage strictly as a relationship between one
man and one woman. A similar definition of marriage was signed into federal
law by President Clinton in 1996.
What is marriage, exactly? Is it a ritual pronouncing a couple
husband and wife? An economic contract for sharing property? A social
agreement for rearing children? A declaration of love made before the
community?
Yes. Academics who study human culture say marriage is all of these
things.
"There's been a lot of debate among anthropologists whether marriage
is universal or not," said Monique Borgerhoff-Mulder, a professor in that
field at the University of California, Davis. "It depends on the definition
of marriage. In every society we know of, there are some kinds of bonds
between men and women - but not necessarily one man and one woman.
"More germane is what the bond is all about. Marriage can be a bond
for sexual reasons, economic reasons or reproductive reasons. Different
societies emphasize different reasons."
The reasons also vary from couple to couple, said Greg Herek, a UC
Davis social psychologist who studies sexual prejudice.
"Why marriage is important is a different story for each couple,"
Herek said. "For some, it boils down to practical issues of money and taxes
and legal status. For others, it boils down to having their relationship
recognized by their religious community."
Herek said there's historical evidence of commitment ceremonies for
male couples in the early Christian church. "Our notion of what is
homosexual versus heterosexual doesn't exist in every culture," he said.
The one-man/one-woman definition has been the law in Canada - but in
June provincial courts in Ontario and British Columbia ruled it
discriminatory and unconstitutional. As a result, American gay and lesbian
couples are pouring across the border, aiming to wed in Canada and return
home to challenge marriage laws here.
"We've never had a chance to challenge those laws before, but now,
thanks to Canada, we can," said Molly McKay, executive director of Marriage
Equality California, a statewide organization pushing for same-sex marriage.
"The legal point is straightforward. The United States recognizes other
Canadian marriages - so why not marriages of gays and lesbians?
"This is the civil rights issue of our time. We want to be able to
marry, and we want to call it marriage. Domestic partnership is not the
same - it's a stigma placed on gay people, saying 'your love is different.'
People don't write love songs about being domestic partnered."
Still, she said, domestic partnerships have been an important step
toward equality. Since California first established them in 1999, domestic
partnerships have gradually been expanded to include many parental, personal
and property rights formerly limited to married couples.
If signed into law this year, a broad new bill - AB 205 - would bring
most of the legal protections and responsibilities of marriage to
California's domestic partners. But, as a state law, it cannot confer
federal benefits such as citizenship for a foreign spouse or Social Security
for a surviving partner.
Sitting at their dining table on a quiet summer evening, McBride and
Yutzy agreed that they want it all - all the federal, state and social
benefits that married heterosexuals enjoy, as well as day-to-day recognition
that they are a legitimate couple.
The legal ramifications of a Canadian wedding are unclear, they
acknowledge, but they plan to identify themselves as a married couple on
federal income tax forms and other official documents.
"We're going to test the heck out of it," said Yutzy, 51, a
health-service planner who commutes to a job in Oregon.
"Our agenda is equality," said McBride, 54, who heads up special
programs in the California secretary of state's office. "But I want to make
a really important point. We're talking about marriage as a civil
contract - not a religious sacrament. We're not forcing any church to marry
same-sex couples. That's not something you can legislate."
But many denominations see the issue as more than a difference of
opinion over religious dogma - they're fighting the concept of same-sex
marriage as morally wrong.
That's also how Pat O'Dea sees it. A retired correctional officer
who lives in North Highlands, O'Dea said that marriage cannot be taken out
of its religious context.
"I really don't care what other people do in private," said O'Dea,
who is 44. "But I do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Period. A lot of the foundations of this country were based on religious
belief - including the nature of marriage.
"On the legal front, if they want to call it a partnership, like a
business relationship, I don't have a problem with that. But if you call it
marriage, and it's two men or two women, that's just not right."
O'Dea blames television and movies for making the public more
accepting of gay and lesbian relationships. "People used to be shocked by
this kind of thing," he said, "but now they've become desensitized to it.
It's like anything goes today. But the Bible says homosexuality is wrong."
There's no point in arguing with such a strongly held personal
viewpoint, said McKay of Marriage Equality California.
"It's civil marriage we're after, not religious," she said. "Our
country is run by the U.S. Constitution, not by the Bible."
If same-sex marriage is legalized in the United States, not all gays
and lesbians will be lining up for marriage licenses. Some, like many
heterosexuals, simply prefer to be single. Others object to participating
in a system they say has a long history of subjugating women.
In her book "The Wedding Complex," Elizabeth Freeman expresses the
wish that there was no such thing as legal marriage, period. In an ideal
world, the UC Davis English professor writes, the state would stop defining
kinship and instead provide universally for basic needs.
"I think there are lots of lesbians and gays who have put same-sex
marriage at the center of their agenda," Freeman said in an interview. "But
a number, who wouldn't work against it, don't consider it to be a critical
reform compared to health care or support to gay and lesbian youth."
Freeman, who is a lesbian, said she respects the wish to be married.
"One set of reasons is for safety and protection," she said.
"Another is the cultural wish to have a relationship that is intelligible to
the rest of one's family. That's an honorable wish, but not one I share."
For McBride and Yutzy, the public pronouncement of their abiding love
is key. So is the rite that proclaims it.
They realized the importance of the public ritual during their civil
union ceremony in Vermont.
"We didn't expect the ceremony to be emotional," Yutzy said. "But
when the judge said, 'Now, by the power vested in me,' we were overwhelmed.
It wasn't just us having our own little ceremony because no one else would
do it. This was real."
. About the Writer: The Bee's Dorothy Korber can be reached at (916)
321-1061 or dkorber@sacbee.com.
August 10, 2003
Pittsburgh bishop meets with clergy over options, Gay strides don't translate to acceptance; Support sags for homo rights, Gay issues expected in NH
1. PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE Episcopal Church gears for changes; Pittsburgh bishop meets with clergy over options
2. FLORIDA TODAY Gay strides don't translate to acceptance; Support sags for homosexual rights despite gains
3. ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION Gay issues expected to affect New Hampshire vote; Rights a hot topic in state with first presidential primary
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, August 10, 2003
Box 947, Pittsburgh, PA, 15230
(Fax: 412-263-2014 ) (E-Mail: letters@post-gazette.com )
( http://www.post-gazette.com/ )
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03222/210686.stm
Episcopal Church gears for changes
Pittsburgh bishop meets with clergy over options
By Steve Levin, Post-Gazette Staff Writer
The Episcopal Church's triennial convention in Minneapolis may have
ended Friday, but the ripples from its confirmation of an openly gay bishop
already are roiling waters in Pittsburgh and throughout the Anglican world.
The Rev. V. Gene Robinson will be consecrated as bishop of New
Hampshire in November. By then, it's possible that the Pittsburgh Diocese
will look much different than it does now and it's likely that the Episcopal
Church USA will be irrevocably altered.
Pittsburgh Bishop Robert W. Duncan Jr., who has helped transform the
diocese into a conservative bastion, has said more than once that he would
not take the unprecedented action of removing the diocese from the
2.3-million-member Episcopal Church.
Duncan said he met for about 75 minutes yesterday with about 70
active and retired clergy to talk about what happened at the convention, to
tell the priests how they might comfort parishioners displeased with the
church's "ungodly innovation" and to discuss what happens next.
He said parishioners should know the diocese, regardless of what
happens elsewhere, will not depart from orthodoxy. That means no blessing
of same-sex unions and no ordination of anyone involved in a sexual
relationship outside of marriage.
Interviewed after the meeting, which took place at St. Martin's
Episcopal Church in Monroeville, Duncan said parishioners should take
comfort knowing the presiding bishops, or primates, of the worldwide
Anglican Communion will address the American church's decision at a meeting
in October.
Meanwhile, Duncan said he hopes to meet this week with his "standing
committee" of advisers to discuss the diocese's next moves. He declined to
elaborate.
While Duncan said neither he nor clergy who stand with him want to
lead people out of the Episcopal Church, he noted "a house divided against
itself cannot stand." As a last resort, he said, he would make provision
for clergy or congregations who want to follow the church's new policies.
"If they want to go," he said, "I'll let them go."
At the convention, it was Duncan who led 19 active and retired
bishops to the front of the House of Bishops to plead for intervention by
the Anglican Communion in "the pastoral emergency that has overtaken us."
In the immediate aftermath of the convention, churches in Pittsburgh
are undergoing wrenching self-appraisals.
The Rev. Philip Wainwright of St. Peter's Episcopal Church in
Brentwood put a message on the sign outside his church reading "Still
faithful to Scripture - One Bible beats 100 Bishops" in reference to the
vote to confirm Robinson.
"We are at risk of losing people. There's a great deal of anguish
about this among some," Wainwright said in an e-mail response to a question.
"For the first time, I'm finding it hard to live by the New Testament's
teaching on unity in the church."
The Rev. Harold T. Lewis of Calvary Episcopal Church in Shadyside,
who described himself and his church as "the loyal opposition" to Duncan,
said, "The diocese is more divided than it has been and this will draw the
line in the sand even further."
But the leader of at least one church - the Rev. Geoff Chapman of St.
Stephen's in Sewickley - said that the Robinson confirmation "moves us
across a fundamental line in the life and ministry of the Episcopal Church,"
and said he and his congregation are looking at several possible courses of
action.
"Only in the most extreme unfortunate circumstances," Chapman said,
would he take his congregation out of the Episcopal Church. But he added
that the church was making the decision for him.
"The American Episcopal Church is in the process of leaving the
Anglican Communion and Gospel ministry," Chapman said, "and there are many
of us that will not go with it."
Chapman said St. Stephen's, which has a Sunday attendance of about
1,200 people, would not leave the Pittsburgh Diocese. Rather, it would ally
itself with "an emerging network of congregations, dioceses and overseas
partners to continue the Gospel ministry and bring discipline to the
church."
Chapman has some options. He could declare St. Stephen's as having
an impaired or broken communion with the Episcopal Church, in which the
church refuses to participate in or receive Holy Eucharist. Or his church
could withdraw from the diocese and join the Anglican Mission in America, a
federation of some 50 former Episcopal Church congregations under the aegis
of the worldwide Anglican Communion through the primates of Rwanda and South
East Asia.
A third choice would be joining a parallel province of like-minded
churches recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury as distinct from the
Episcopal Church.
"We're not looking at [the gay bishop confirmation] as some kind of
wonderful recruitment tool," said the Rev. Jay Greener, a spokesman for the
Anglican Mission in America. But "this direction has been the trend of the
Episcopal Church leadership for some time."
For the Pittsburgh Diocese, there is a desire among all the parishes
to move away from the topic of sex and back into ministry.
But the debate still has a long way to go.
"When Bishop Duncan appointed me to this position of priest
associate, he knew perfectly well that he and I did not agree on this very
big and major issue," said the Rev. Lynn Edwards, associate priest of
Trinity Cathedral and the only openly gay priest in the Pittsburgh Diocese.
"But we are also trying to set an example. Can two ordained persons,
a bishop and a priest, work together despite this huge elephant in the
living room? If we can, we can model something of Christ's love to a
fragmented Church."
. Steve Levin can be reached at slevin@post-gazette.com or
412-263-1919.)
Florida Today, August 10, 2003
Box 419000, Melbourne, FL, 32941
(Fax: 407-242-6620 ) ( http://www.floridatoday.com )
(Online Mailer: http://www.floridatoday.com/news/editorial/letterform.htm )
http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/peoplestoryA8548A.htm
Gay strides don't translate to acceptance
Support sags for homosexual rights despite gains
By Pam Harbaugh and Sam Eifling, Florida Today
Gary Schutte is not convinced.
There may be more gay-themed shows on television, more opening up of
society for homosexuals in religion and politics, but Schutte, an openly gay
man, doesn't see that as an acceptance of homosexuals.
Instead, Schutte, 55, of Melbourne, thinks it's all a perceived
acceptance, driven by the media, especially television. Currently, there
are three popular gay-themed television shows being broadcast: "Will and
Grace," "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" and "Boy Meets Boy." CBS's "The
Amazing Race" features a gay couple. On Monday, AMC will air "The AMC
Project: Gay Hollywood," a documentary about gay men making their way in
Hollywood.
"The media has always been more accepting (than society)," Schutte
said.
He could be right.
Three separate Gallup polls since the Supreme Court overturned a
Texas sodomy law in June have shown declining support for homosexual rights.
The percentage of Americans who responded that "homosexual relations between
consenting adults" should be legal had increased from 32 percent in 1986 to
a high of 60 percent this May.
But a poll in late July showed that number had dropped to 48 percent,
the lowest in four years.
The polls were conducted before the Episcopal Church confirmed the
Rev. V. Gene Robinson as its first openly gay bishop last week.
Reactions among Brevard residents are as divided as the poll results.
"What really surprised me was the high rate of acceptance," said
Melbourne resident Woody Keels, a retired Army sergeant major and human
resource director. "Now, it's fallen back down to the lower rate, which
(shows) basically people are saying enough is enough."
But the poll results surprised Rockledge resident Jennifer Fague, a
choreographer for Cocoa Village Playhouse. In light of recent gay-friendly
developments in religious, political and cultural corners, she thought
society had become more accepting of homosexuals.
"'Queer Eye for the Straight Guy' is my favorite new show," she said.
"I love it. It's hysterical, and these days, straight men need some help,
and who better to help them? And, I'm Episcopalian. When I heard about the
gay bishop, I thought, 'What a great improvement that is.'"
Media contradictions
It's not unusual for there to be a contradiction between the way a
particular minority is discriminated against and how they are actually
perceived, said author David Lavery, popular culture expert with the English
department at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesboro, Tenn.
"There's always been a difference between media depiction of a
minority group and how that group has been accepted," he said. "As depicted
in 'Amos and Andy,' (African-Americans) were the subject of laughter while
being discriminated against in the real world."
However, Lavery sees homosexuals as having an advantage in the media
that African-Americans never had in their pursuit of equality - money.
While gays and lesbians make slightly less than their heterosexual
counterparts, according to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force think
tank, they do represent a demographic that media can't afford to ignore.
Cultural shift
In fact, television reveals a love affair with the gay culture,
Lavery said.
"We see a gay man as someone who has his act together," he said.
"There's a cultural shift, from limp wrist to impeccably neat. We have this
wildly disordered culture psychologically and materialistically in many
ways, but gays have come to represent people who know what they're doing."
A personal matter
Not that every potential viewer finds that depiction of gay men -
narrow though it may be - appealing. Merritt Island resident Larry Swagger,
for one, thinks the backlash the Gallop [sic] poll indicated arose from
gay-themed television and gay issues being shoved into the face of America.
As he left the Dixie Crossroads Seafood Restaurant in Titusville last
week, Swagger said a person's sexuality "is a personal matter."
Also sensing a backlash was Mims resident Bev Farness, who was going
into the restaurant. She said the response is justified.
"If they hadn't made such a big issue, it wouldn't be such a big
issue," she said.
Political battles
Voters will have to prepare for homosexual rights to become an even
bigger issue in the 2004 election. Last month, President Bush said he had
lawyers working on ways to "codify" marriage as being a union between a man
and a woman, and the Vatican slammed gay marriage as deviant. Those
statements came even as American same-sex couples were getting married in
Toronto, where gay marriage became legal in June.
On the other side of the aisle, most of the Democratic presidential
hopefuls support civil unions and equal rights for same-sex couples. One,
former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, signed the country's first bill
allowing same-sex civil unions in 2000.
Americans will be asked to decide how gays and lesbians should fit
into society. Do they deserve, legally, to be able to marry? To become
physically intimate with those they love? To be able to adopt children? To
enter relatives-only hospital rooms when their partners are hurt? To
inherit property and receive Social Security benefits when their partners
die? Television is just a sliver of the cultural battle lines being drawn.
"What these polls are actually reflecting is the fact that the
country is having a very real conversation on how society treats the gay
community," said Nadine Smith, executive director of Equality Florida, a
Tampa-based advocacy group focusing on gay issues. "The Supreme Court
decision, Canada legalizing marriage, the cultural presence of gay-themed
art and programming - all of these things combined is finally provoking the
conversation that's deeper than just, someone's gay."
Tolerance vs. acceptance
For many, attitudes will hinge on tolerance rather than acceptance,
said the Rev. Dr. Roy H. McCormick, the interim pastor at the First
Presbyterian Church of Palm Bay.
McCormick said he tolerates homosexuals. And as the polls might
suggest, he's struggling with his opinions.
As far as depictions of gays on television shows like "Will and
Grace" or "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," he calls them "caricatures," and
not like the homosexuals he knows from his fellowship.
"Those are normal people," he said. "Most of my homosexual
acquaintances would run from (the TV caricatures) like the flu."
Despite calling them "normal," McCormick, and apparently millions of
other Americans, sees homosexuals as people who choose a lifestyle contrary
to nature.
"It's very confusing," said Cindy Maronde, a Merritt Island artist.
"I have no problem with whatever lifestyle they want to live. It's the fact
that they make an issue of their sexuality that bothers me."
Opinion swings
Other Gallup polls reflected such an ambiguous attitude. In May, 54
percent of poll respondents felt "homosexuality should be considered an
acceptable alternative lifestyle." In July, 46 percent did. Also in May,
Americans were deadlocked, 49 percent pro and con, on allowing "homosexual
couples to legally form civil unions." Last month, 57 percent were in
opposition and 40 percent in favor, the widest rift since Gallup began
asking the question in late 2000.
The most precipitous swing in opinion was among black Americans, who
were 40 percent less likely to support legal homosexual relations in July as
in May, though the opinion shifts cut across almost all demographic,
geographic and socioeconomic groups.
Still, practically everyone in this country knows someone who is
homosexual. Maybe he or she is a family member, a friend, a co-worker or a
spiritual leader. Americans may be caught in the conundrum of loving the
sinner, hating the sin. Of tolerating the homosexual, but not accepting him
or her.
That's part of the birthing process for a new mindset, said Jerry
Seay, an openly gay co-pastor of the East Coast Metropolitan Community
Church in Melbourne.
While people are in a backlash against the gay marriage issue, they
are thinking about homosexuals in more "normal" roles in society, he said.
Culture, politics and religion are laying the groundwork for a better
acceptance of homosexuality in American society, he said.
"I think we're going to see over the next few years a whole attitude
develop in the United States," he said. "I think that eventually, we're
going to see a very moderate and accepting attitude. But it's going to take
a little while."
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 10, 2003
72 Marietta Street NW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
(Fax: 404-526-5746 ) (E-Mail: journal@ajc.com )
( http://www.accessatlanta.com )
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0803/10gay.html
Gay issues expected to affect N.H. vote
Rights a hot topic in state with first presidential primary
By Mia Taylor, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
CONCORD, N.H. - In a church office that sits in the shadow of the
state Capitol's shining gold dome, the Rev. David Jones talked with a
parishioner.
The meeting was taking longer then expected. The parishioner was
having a hard time coming to terms with the Episcopalian Church's recent
decision to elect the Rev. V. Gene Robinson, a gay man, the bishop of the
Diocese of New Hampshire.
After an hour, the door to Jones' office opened and the parishioner
emerged looking calm, but not quite at ease.
"It's going to be a journey," Jones, head of St. Paul's Episcopal
Church, later said of the questions the man is grappling with.
In coffee shops, on street corners, at golf outings and lunch
gatherings, the significance of Robinson's appointment is the focus of much
discussion.
And since this is New Hampshire, politics inevitably looms large.
The state takes great pride in its role as the host of the nation's first
presidential primaries. Campaign offices of presidential candidates already
line the streets around the Capitol building here.
The question that often dominates the conversation is whether
Robinson's election is another signal that gay rights may emerge as a
defining issue in next year's race for the White House, given several other
developments on the front.
For instance, there are lawsuits pending against the military's
"Don't ask, don't tell" policy, the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts
is weighing a lawsuit that seeks to legalize same-sex marriages, the
Catholic Church and President Bush have inveighed against any such unions,
while at its conference in San Francisco, the American Bar Association, the
nation's largest lawyers' group, is considering endorsing the right of
homosexual couples to adopt children.
The issue of gay rights is "absolutely critical," says James Pindell,
managing editor of a New Hampshire political insiders Web site called
NHpolitics.com. "Not only has it been coming up at campaign events and
candidate meet-and-greets, it has also mobilized the conservative right.
This will be one of the major social issues of the campaign."
When members of the New Hampshire branch of the Episcopal Church
gathered months ago to narrow down candidates for bishop, Jones, a member of
the search committee, said there were no thoughts of pushing a political
agenda. Nor were there discussions about sexuality or making history.
New Hampshire represents an interesting dichotomy, say those who live
here. It's a state whose residents pride themselves on their "live and let
live" attitude and fiercely oppose any encroachment by the government into
their private lives.
"New Hampshire overall, politically, is Libertarian," said Pindell.
National perceptions
Many residents here conceded, however, that nationally, New Hampshire
is largely perceived as a state that's staunchly conservative.
As she sat in a coffee shop on Main Street in Concord eating
blueberry pie, Sandra Dingman, who owns a local bed-and-breakfast, said
Robinson's appointment has been an immensely popular topic of conversation
among her guests.
"Everyone is quite interested to see what will happen now with gay
marriages," she said. "Personally, I think it's great. But I'm surprised
it happened here, in such a politically conservative place. . . . I don't
think it will affect politics in any way."
For others, Robinson's election and the larger issue of gay rights
are not even registering on their personal radar.
"To be honest, I'm not Episcopalian. I'm not religious. I know the
whole gay marriage thing is a hot topic, but I think there's a few more
important issues facing America," said 51-year-old Manchester resident Tom
Bassuls.
2002 election's impact
Ray Buckley, the eastern regional director of Democratic Sen. Joe
Lieberman's presidential campaign, has only to think back to a night after
the 2002 election to explain why he thinks gay rights will figure
prominently in 2004.
There was a meeting to discuss what had happened.
"Each state chairperson gave [a] report about their state," recalled
Buckley, an eight-term openly gay New Hampshire state representative. "More
than a majority said some anti-gay Republican thing had happened. . . . It
is clear to me the right wing is energized by mention of gay and lesbian
citizens and their rights."
Democratic presidential candidate Carol Moseley Braun believes
whether gay rights issues top the presidential election agenda depends on
the White House.
"The extent to which gay rights will be an issue depends on how much
President George W. Bush wants to change the subject from his failed
economic policies," she said.
Buckley, from Lieberman's campaign, marvels at how much prominence
the issue of gay rights has already earned.
As he worked a New Hampshire crowd with Lieberman on Friday, a woman
came up to Buckley and identified herself as a lesbian. She questioned him
about gay marriage legislation.
He responded by saying: "Close your eyes and think back a few years.
Did you ever think you'd have a conversation with a presidential candidate
about gay marriage?"
2. FLORIDA TODAY Gay strides don't translate to acceptance; Support sags for homosexual rights despite gains
3. ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION Gay issues expected to affect New Hampshire vote; Rights a hot topic in state with first presidential primary
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, August 10, 2003
Box 947, Pittsburgh, PA, 15230
(Fax: 412-263-2014 ) (E-Mail: letters@post-gazette.com )
( http://www.post-gazette.com/ )
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03222/210686.stm
Episcopal Church gears for changes
Pittsburgh bishop meets with clergy over options
By Steve Levin, Post-Gazette Staff Writer
The Episcopal Church's triennial convention in Minneapolis may have
ended Friday, but the ripples from its confirmation of an openly gay bishop
already are roiling waters in Pittsburgh and throughout the Anglican world.
The Rev. V. Gene Robinson will be consecrated as bishop of New
Hampshire in November. By then, it's possible that the Pittsburgh Diocese
will look much different than it does now and it's likely that the Episcopal
Church USA will be irrevocably altered.
Pittsburgh Bishop Robert W. Duncan Jr., who has helped transform the
diocese into a conservative bastion, has said more than once that he would
not take the unprecedented action of removing the diocese from the
2.3-million-member Episcopal Church.
Duncan said he met for about 75 minutes yesterday with about 70
active and retired clergy to talk about what happened at the convention, to
tell the priests how they might comfort parishioners displeased with the
church's "ungodly innovation" and to discuss what happens next.
He said parishioners should know the diocese, regardless of what
happens elsewhere, will not depart from orthodoxy. That means no blessing
of same-sex unions and no ordination of anyone involved in a sexual
relationship outside of marriage.
Interviewed after the meeting, which took place at St. Martin's
Episcopal Church in Monroeville, Duncan said parishioners should take
comfort knowing the presiding bishops, or primates, of the worldwide
Anglican Communion will address the American church's decision at a meeting
in October.
Meanwhile, Duncan said he hopes to meet this week with his "standing
committee" of advisers to discuss the diocese's next moves. He declined to
elaborate.
While Duncan said neither he nor clergy who stand with him want to
lead people out of the Episcopal Church, he noted "a house divided against
itself cannot stand." As a last resort, he said, he would make provision
for clergy or congregations who want to follow the church's new policies.
"If they want to go," he said, "I'll let them go."
At the convention, it was Duncan who led 19 active and retired
bishops to the front of the House of Bishops to plead for intervention by
the Anglican Communion in "the pastoral emergency that has overtaken us."
In the immediate aftermath of the convention, churches in Pittsburgh
are undergoing wrenching self-appraisals.
The Rev. Philip Wainwright of St. Peter's Episcopal Church in
Brentwood put a message on the sign outside his church reading "Still
faithful to Scripture - One Bible beats 100 Bishops" in reference to the
vote to confirm Robinson.
"We are at risk of losing people. There's a great deal of anguish
about this among some," Wainwright said in an e-mail response to a question.
"For the first time, I'm finding it hard to live by the New Testament's
teaching on unity in the church."
The Rev. Harold T. Lewis of Calvary Episcopal Church in Shadyside,
who described himself and his church as "the loyal opposition" to Duncan,
said, "The diocese is more divided than it has been and this will draw the
line in the sand even further."
But the leader of at least one church - the Rev. Geoff Chapman of St.
Stephen's in Sewickley - said that the Robinson confirmation "moves us
across a fundamental line in the life and ministry of the Episcopal Church,"
and said he and his congregation are looking at several possible courses of
action.
"Only in the most extreme unfortunate circumstances," Chapman said,
would he take his congregation out of the Episcopal Church. But he added
that the church was making the decision for him.
"The American Episcopal Church is in the process of leaving the
Anglican Communion and Gospel ministry," Chapman said, "and there are many
of us that will not go with it."
Chapman said St. Stephen's, which has a Sunday attendance of about
1,200 people, would not leave the Pittsburgh Diocese. Rather, it would ally
itself with "an emerging network of congregations, dioceses and overseas
partners to continue the Gospel ministry and bring discipline to the
church."
Chapman has some options. He could declare St. Stephen's as having
an impaired or broken communion with the Episcopal Church, in which the
church refuses to participate in or receive Holy Eucharist. Or his church
could withdraw from the diocese and join the Anglican Mission in America, a
federation of some 50 former Episcopal Church congregations under the aegis
of the worldwide Anglican Communion through the primates of Rwanda and South
East Asia.
A third choice would be joining a parallel province of like-minded
churches recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury as distinct from the
Episcopal Church.
"We're not looking at [the gay bishop confirmation] as some kind of
wonderful recruitment tool," said the Rev. Jay Greener, a spokesman for the
Anglican Mission in America. But "this direction has been the trend of the
Episcopal Church leadership for some time."
For the Pittsburgh Diocese, there is a desire among all the parishes
to move away from the topic of sex and back into ministry.
But the debate still has a long way to go.
"When Bishop Duncan appointed me to this position of priest
associate, he knew perfectly well that he and I did not agree on this very
big and major issue," said the Rev. Lynn Edwards, associate priest of
Trinity Cathedral and the only openly gay priest in the Pittsburgh Diocese.
"But we are also trying to set an example. Can two ordained persons,
a bishop and a priest, work together despite this huge elephant in the
living room? If we can, we can model something of Christ's love to a
fragmented Church."
. Steve Levin can be reached at slevin@post-gazette.com or
412-263-1919.)
Florida Today, August 10, 2003
Box 419000, Melbourne, FL, 32941
(Fax: 407-242-6620 ) ( http://www.floridatoday.com )
(Online Mailer: http://www.floridatoday.com/news/editorial/letterform.htm )
http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/peoplestoryA8548A.htm
Gay strides don't translate to acceptance
Support sags for homosexual rights despite gains
By Pam Harbaugh and Sam Eifling, Florida Today
Gary Schutte is not convinced.
There may be more gay-themed shows on television, more opening up of
society for homosexuals in religion and politics, but Schutte, an openly gay
man, doesn't see that as an acceptance of homosexuals.
Instead, Schutte, 55, of Melbourne, thinks it's all a perceived
acceptance, driven by the media, especially television. Currently, there
are three popular gay-themed television shows being broadcast: "Will and
Grace," "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" and "Boy Meets Boy." CBS's "The
Amazing Race" features a gay couple. On Monday, AMC will air "The AMC
Project: Gay Hollywood," a documentary about gay men making their way in
Hollywood.
"The media has always been more accepting (than society)," Schutte
said.
He could be right.
Three separate Gallup polls since the Supreme Court overturned a
Texas sodomy law in June have shown declining support for homosexual rights.
The percentage of Americans who responded that "homosexual relations between
consenting adults" should be legal had increased from 32 percent in 1986 to
a high of 60 percent this May.
But a poll in late July showed that number had dropped to 48 percent,
the lowest in four years.
The polls were conducted before the Episcopal Church confirmed the
Rev. V. Gene Robinson as its first openly gay bishop last week.
Reactions among Brevard residents are as divided as the poll results.
"What really surprised me was the high rate of acceptance," said
Melbourne resident Woody Keels, a retired Army sergeant major and human
resource director. "Now, it's fallen back down to the lower rate, which
(shows) basically people are saying enough is enough."
But the poll results surprised Rockledge resident Jennifer Fague, a
choreographer for Cocoa Village Playhouse. In light of recent gay-friendly
developments in religious, political and cultural corners, she thought
society had become more accepting of homosexuals.
"'Queer Eye for the Straight Guy' is my favorite new show," she said.
"I love it. It's hysterical, and these days, straight men need some help,
and who better to help them? And, I'm Episcopalian. When I heard about the
gay bishop, I thought, 'What a great improvement that is.'"
Media contradictions
It's not unusual for there to be a contradiction between the way a
particular minority is discriminated against and how they are actually
perceived, said author David Lavery, popular culture expert with the English
department at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesboro, Tenn.
"There's always been a difference between media depiction of a
minority group and how that group has been accepted," he said. "As depicted
in 'Amos and Andy,' (African-Americans) were the subject of laughter while
being discriminated against in the real world."
However, Lavery sees homosexuals as having an advantage in the media
that African-Americans never had in their pursuit of equality - money.
While gays and lesbians make slightly less than their heterosexual
counterparts, according to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force think
tank, they do represent a demographic that media can't afford to ignore.
Cultural shift
In fact, television reveals a love affair with the gay culture,
Lavery said.
"We see a gay man as someone who has his act together," he said.
"There's a cultural shift, from limp wrist to impeccably neat. We have this
wildly disordered culture psychologically and materialistically in many
ways, but gays have come to represent people who know what they're doing."
A personal matter
Not that every potential viewer finds that depiction of gay men -
narrow though it may be - appealing. Merritt Island resident Larry Swagger,
for one, thinks the backlash the Gallop [sic] poll indicated arose from
gay-themed television and gay issues being shoved into the face of America.
As he left the Dixie Crossroads Seafood Restaurant in Titusville last
week, Swagger said a person's sexuality "is a personal matter."
Also sensing a backlash was Mims resident Bev Farness, who was going
into the restaurant. She said the response is justified.
"If they hadn't made such a big issue, it wouldn't be such a big
issue," she said.
Political battles
Voters will have to prepare for homosexual rights to become an even
bigger issue in the 2004 election. Last month, President Bush said he had
lawyers working on ways to "codify" marriage as being a union between a man
and a woman, and the Vatican slammed gay marriage as deviant. Those
statements came even as American same-sex couples were getting married in
Toronto, where gay marriage became legal in June.
On the other side of the aisle, most of the Democratic presidential
hopefuls support civil unions and equal rights for same-sex couples. One,
former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, signed the country's first bill
allowing same-sex civil unions in 2000.
Americans will be asked to decide how gays and lesbians should fit
into society. Do they deserve, legally, to be able to marry? To become
physically intimate with those they love? To be able to adopt children? To
enter relatives-only hospital rooms when their partners are hurt? To
inherit property and receive Social Security benefits when their partners
die? Television is just a sliver of the cultural battle lines being drawn.
"What these polls are actually reflecting is the fact that the
country is having a very real conversation on how society treats the gay
community," said Nadine Smith, executive director of Equality Florida, a
Tampa-based advocacy group focusing on gay issues. "The Supreme Court
decision, Canada legalizing marriage, the cultural presence of gay-themed
art and programming - all of these things combined is finally provoking the
conversation that's deeper than just, someone's gay."
Tolerance vs. acceptance
For many, attitudes will hinge on tolerance rather than acceptance,
said the Rev. Dr. Roy H. McCormick, the interim pastor at the First
Presbyterian Church of Palm Bay.
McCormick said he tolerates homosexuals. And as the polls might
suggest, he's struggling with his opinions.
As far as depictions of gays on television shows like "Will and
Grace" or "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," he calls them "caricatures," and
not like the homosexuals he knows from his fellowship.
"Those are normal people," he said. "Most of my homosexual
acquaintances would run from (the TV caricatures) like the flu."
Despite calling them "normal," McCormick, and apparently millions of
other Americans, sees homosexuals as people who choose a lifestyle contrary
to nature.
"It's very confusing," said Cindy Maronde, a Merritt Island artist.
"I have no problem with whatever lifestyle they want to live. It's the fact
that they make an issue of their sexuality that bothers me."
Opinion swings
Other Gallup polls reflected such an ambiguous attitude. In May, 54
percent of poll respondents felt "homosexuality should be considered an
acceptable alternative lifestyle." In July, 46 percent did. Also in May,
Americans were deadlocked, 49 percent pro and con, on allowing "homosexual
couples to legally form civil unions." Last month, 57 percent were in
opposition and 40 percent in favor, the widest rift since Gallup began
asking the question in late 2000.
The most precipitous swing in opinion was among black Americans, who
were 40 percent less likely to support legal homosexual relations in July as
in May, though the opinion shifts cut across almost all demographic,
geographic and socioeconomic groups.
Still, practically everyone in this country knows someone who is
homosexual. Maybe he or she is a family member, a friend, a co-worker or a
spiritual leader. Americans may be caught in the conundrum of loving the
sinner, hating the sin. Of tolerating the homosexual, but not accepting him
or her.
That's part of the birthing process for a new mindset, said Jerry
Seay, an openly gay co-pastor of the East Coast Metropolitan Community
Church in Melbourne.
While people are in a backlash against the gay marriage issue, they
are thinking about homosexuals in more "normal" roles in society, he said.
Culture, politics and religion are laying the groundwork for a better
acceptance of homosexuality in American society, he said.
"I think we're going to see over the next few years a whole attitude
develop in the United States," he said. "I think that eventually, we're
going to see a very moderate and accepting attitude. But it's going to take
a little while."
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, August 10, 2003
72 Marietta Street NW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
(Fax: 404-526-5746 ) (E-Mail: journal@ajc.com )
( http://www.accessatlanta.com )
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0803/10gay.html
Gay issues expected to affect N.H. vote
Rights a hot topic in state with first presidential primary
By Mia Taylor, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
CONCORD, N.H. - In a church office that sits in the shadow of the
state Capitol's shining gold dome, the Rev. David Jones talked with a
parishioner.
The meeting was taking longer then expected. The parishioner was
having a hard time coming to terms with the Episcopalian Church's recent
decision to elect the Rev. V. Gene Robinson, a gay man, the bishop of the
Diocese of New Hampshire.
After an hour, the door to Jones' office opened and the parishioner
emerged looking calm, but not quite at ease.
"It's going to be a journey," Jones, head of St. Paul's Episcopal
Church, later said of the questions the man is grappling with.
In coffee shops, on street corners, at golf outings and lunch
gatherings, the significance of Robinson's appointment is the focus of much
discussion.
And since this is New Hampshire, politics inevitably looms large.
The state takes great pride in its role as the host of the nation's first
presidential primaries. Campaign offices of presidential candidates already
line the streets around the Capitol building here.
The question that often dominates the conversation is whether
Robinson's election is another signal that gay rights may emerge as a
defining issue in next year's race for the White House, given several other
developments on the front.
For instance, there are lawsuits pending against the military's
"Don't ask, don't tell" policy, the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts
is weighing a lawsuit that seeks to legalize same-sex marriages, the
Catholic Church and President Bush have inveighed against any such unions,
while at its conference in San Francisco, the American Bar Association, the
nation's largest lawyers' group, is considering endorsing the right of
homosexual couples to adopt children.
The issue of gay rights is "absolutely critical," says James Pindell,
managing editor of a New Hampshire political insiders Web site called
NHpolitics.com. "Not only has it been coming up at campaign events and
candidate meet-and-greets, it has also mobilized the conservative right.
This will be one of the major social issues of the campaign."
When members of the New Hampshire branch of the Episcopal Church
gathered months ago to narrow down candidates for bishop, Jones, a member of
the search committee, said there were no thoughts of pushing a political
agenda. Nor were there discussions about sexuality or making history.
New Hampshire represents an interesting dichotomy, say those who live
here. It's a state whose residents pride themselves on their "live and let
live" attitude and fiercely oppose any encroachment by the government into
their private lives.
"New Hampshire overall, politically, is Libertarian," said Pindell.
National perceptions
Many residents here conceded, however, that nationally, New Hampshire
is largely perceived as a state that's staunchly conservative.
As she sat in a coffee shop on Main Street in Concord eating
blueberry pie, Sandra Dingman, who owns a local bed-and-breakfast, said
Robinson's appointment has been an immensely popular topic of conversation
among her guests.
"Everyone is quite interested to see what will happen now with gay
marriages," she said. "Personally, I think it's great. But I'm surprised
it happened here, in such a politically conservative place. . . . I don't
think it will affect politics in any way."
For others, Robinson's election and the larger issue of gay rights
are not even registering on their personal radar.
"To be honest, I'm not Episcopalian. I'm not religious. I know the
whole gay marriage thing is a hot topic, but I think there's a few more
important issues facing America," said 51-year-old Manchester resident Tom
Bassuls.
2002 election's impact
Ray Buckley, the eastern regional director of Democratic Sen. Joe
Lieberman's presidential campaign, has only to think back to a night after
the 2002 election to explain why he thinks gay rights will figure
prominently in 2004.
There was a meeting to discuss what had happened.
"Each state chairperson gave [a] report about their state," recalled
Buckley, an eight-term openly gay New Hampshire state representative. "More
than a majority said some anti-gay Republican thing had happened. . . . It
is clear to me the right wing is energized by mention of gay and lesbian
citizens and their rights."
Democratic presidential candidate Carol Moseley Braun believes
whether gay rights issues top the presidential election agenda depends on
the White House.
"The extent to which gay rights will be an issue depends on how much
President George W. Bush wants to change the subject from his failed
economic policies," she said.
Buckley, from Lieberman's campaign, marvels at how much prominence
the issue of gay rights has already earned.
As he worked a New Hampshire crowd with Lieberman on Friday, a woman
came up to Buckley and identified herself as a lesbian. She questioned him
about gay marriage legislation.
He responded by saying: "Close your eyes and think back a few years.
Did you ever think you'd have a conversation with a presidential candidate
about gay marriage?"