Daily Show: The Mocking of Marriage Equality Opponents and the Concept of Gay Divorce

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Dreaded Bliss
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
No Gay Out
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

VIDEO: Mormon Documents Headed to Prop 8 Trial?

The Sanctity of Marriage

POLL: Majority of Catholics in New Jersey Support Marriage Equality

Despite the ongoing efforts of the Catholic Church's leadership in New Jersey, a new poll released today finds that a majority of the Garden State's Catholics support marriage equality. 48% support, while 40% oppose and 12% are undecided. This is big news given that 37% of New Jersey is Catholic.

The breakdown of the poll is rather interesting but not surprising. Those who indicated they were Catholic and attended mass at least once a week, 54% opposed while 37% favored; if they attended once a month, 35% opposed while 46% favored.

"As with several social issues, many Catholics support a more liberal public policy than does the Church itself," said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University. "Given that Catholics comprise the largest religious group in the state, this makes a difference in overall support for gay marriage in New Jersey, especially since a majority of Protestants — many of whom are Evangelicals — oppose the bill."

Evangelical or "born-again" Protestants opposed marriage equality by a margin of 55% to 35%, with 11% undecided.

Another religious group with an encouraging majority. Jewish respondents supported 56% to 40% with 4% undecided.

Least shocking, those not affiliated with any religion support marriage equality 85% to 10% with 5% undecided.

The poll of 903 New Jersey adults was fielded November 6-10 and has a margin of error of 3.3 percent.

Recently, the sponsors of the state's marriage equality bill requested that the Senate delay its vote so that the Assembly could hold its own public hearing and vote in its Judiciary Committee.

I would like to bet that this poll will grab the legislature's attention. Despite what the bill's sponsors may say, it's rather obvious the votes are not solidified in either chamber of the state's legislature. Now with the vote delayed, hopefully they'll have time to review the poll that indicates that some of the bill's biggest objectors, who belong to people of faith groups and in particular the influential Catholics, are a minority within their own demographic.

ACTION: Go to Garden State Equality to find out how you can get involved!

The Christian Affirmation Declaration Responds to the Anti-LGBT Manhattan Declaration

Back in November, more than 150 Christian leaders, including Protestant and Catholic, signed the Manhattan Declaration, condemning marriage equality and LGBT rights. (I had a few words to say about that.)

Thankfully, not all Christians, LGBT and non-LGBT, agree with such bigotry. They have gathered and written a response titled The Affirmation Declaration (full document). An excerpt:

We take heart in the knowledge that Christ has been where so many in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (GLBTI) community are. He has gone through the pain of rejection—particularly, the pain of being rejected by the very ones who should have been a wellspring of living water. We are thankful that the God of all comfort has been a keeping power to countless GLBTI Christians, who could, at many times, turn to no one but Him for love, affirmation, and support. We proclaim that He has been enough; but we also unwaveringly declare that He has more in mind for His children than spiritual and emotional isolation—that He desires all of His body of believers to be in fellowship one with the other.

We assert that the pain brought upon our GLBTI brethren in the name of God is not an expression of love. It is not love to bring shame and self-loathing upon people. It is not love to tell parents not to accept their gay children because their affirmation will supposedly make their children not want to change. It certainly is not love to teach the damnable heresy that GLBTI people cannot be saved or go to Heaven until they have been delivered from their natural orientation.

We also call attention to the horrible spiritual effect that antigay theology has had on the secular world. We are deeply troubled by the number of people who have been made to despise Christianity because of the oppressive and tyrannical acts of our Christian brethren. However well intentioned they may believe themselves to be, they continue to short-circuit the gospel of Jesus Christ by imposing their religious beliefs upon the general population. Whether homosexuality is sinful or not, opposing same-sex marriage is not only counterproductive to evangelistic ministry, but it is diametrically opposed to the concept of religious freedom—something that the proponents of the Manhattan Declaration claim to cherish. It appears that what they, instead, champion is their freedom to impose their religious beliefs on others. We reject this hypocritical opposition to same-sex marriage, and stand for true religious liberty in the United States of America and the world.

---------

Finally, we assert that no godly end is served by the cruel treatment of GLBTI people. While we are certain that some among our opponents are bigots and cannot be changed or reasoned with, we humbly challenge those who sincerely disagree with homosexuality for theological reasons to reexamine this most serious issue. For the love of Christ, and the GLBTI population that He so dearly loves, give this issue the due diligence that it is deserving of. Expose yourselves to the other point of view and see, if perchance, Scripture actually does not say what you always believed it to say. If you engage in such an effort sincerely, and emerge with your existing beliefs affirmed, we will bid you Godspeed and pray that Christian fellowship can be maintained while we agree to disagree.

To those who wrote and have signed this declaration - thank you! This is true Christian love if I've ever witnessed it. Though I myself am not a Christian by definition (I do not believe that there's only one path to God while Christians believe Jesus is the one truth path), I respect the core principles of the religion. I was raised in a Christian household. This show of support and love gives me a lot of encouragement that true Christians still exist, and I hope your actions will show the LGBT population that not all are crazy wingnuts.

So far, 405 people have signed the declaration. If you are a person of faith, you can sign by going here.

Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles Elects Second Openly Gay Bishop

UPDATE 12/7/09: It should come as no surprise that that bishop of the Anglican Church is not responding to this well. But what is sickening is that he's quick to rebuke this development of equality, yet lagging behind on speaking out against Uganda's "kill gays" bill. Disgusting.

Original post 12/6/09

One of the goals of UTF's mission statement is to understand our opposition. A lot of the time that leads to reporting on religious groups opposing our civil rights. But I'm always happy to report on other religious groups who fall under the far opposite position.

The Episcopal Church is one of them.

Recently, they lifted their self-imposed ban on ordaining openly gay bishops after much deliberation, despite the fact that it has caused a major schism with its sister Anglican Church in Europe, who doesn't view LGBT people the same way. They will also soon be crafting a blessing specifically for married same-sex couples. They have left it up to their parishes to decide for themselves whether or not to marry gay couples. Recently in Massachusetts, the local Episcopal bishop gave permission for priests in the eastern part of the state to do just that.

Here in Los Angeles, the Episcopal Church has decided on another amazing act of equality. After meeting in Riverside, CA on Saturday, church leaders elected for the first time in the church's 114-year history two women to be bishops - Rev. Canon Diane Jardine Bruce, 53, the rector of a San Clemente church, and Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool, 55, for the Dioecese of Los Angeles.

What's even more historical about this vote is that Glasspool has openly been in a relationship with another woman for over 20 years. She is a the first gay bishop elected for the Episcopal Church since Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire in 2003.

Los Angeles Times reports:

Convention delegates said that Glasspool's sexual orientation was only one factor in their decision, which came on the seventh ballot for the position. They called her a gifted priest with extensive diocesan experience in her current role as canon -- or executive assistant -- to the bishops of the Diocese of Maryland.

"I don't think it's a referendum on electing a woman or a gay person," said the Very Rev. Mark Kowalewski, dean of St. John's Cathedral in downtown Los Angeles. "Those are secondary characteristics.

Rev. Glasspool has released the following statement:

Gracias con todo mi corazon. I am not unaware of the many complicated dynamics that have been part of this election -- and I want to acknowledge them. Any group of people who have been oppressed because of any one, isolated aspect of their persons yearns for justice and equal rights. My own heart has been stressed deeply today. To Martir, I honor you and pledge you my ongoing love and support. To my Latino and Hispanic brothers and sisters, I say we're all in this together. We are all working to bring forward the reign of God on earth. So thank you with all my heart.

It is such an honor and a privilege to be among you wonderful people of the Diocese of Los Angeles. I'm deeply and forever grateful for the trust you've shown in me, and I look forward with great excitement to serving together with you, and alongside +Jon and Diane+, in furthering the mission and ministry of Jesus Christ in the world -- in whose name we are all honored to serve.

It has also been an enriching experience to get to know five incredible human beings who have dedicated all of their considerable gifts and life skills to the life and love of the Lord. You all can probably guess that it takes a lot of effort, even courage, to put yourself out there for public examination, questioning, and then voting. It speaks well of the Diocese of Los Angeles that a variety of such well-qualified people stood and stand before you. I hope you will continue to pray for all of us, as we continue to respond to God's call wherever that takes us. May I add my profound thanks to Bishop Bruno and Julian Bull and to all the Search Committee who worked very hard for lo these many months to get us all to this day.

I'm very excited about the future of the whole Episcopal Church, and I see the Diocese of Los Angeles leading the way into that future. But just for this moment, in the coming months, to getting to know you all better, as together we build up the Body of Christ for the world.

The Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool
December 5, 2009

This is great not only for those outside the LGBT population who view us as an "ungodly" group that disrespects religion in all forms and thus view us a bit differently, but it's also good for the LGBT population itself, to see that we have a great, wonderful variety among us. It shows us that religion itself is not bad, that it can be accepting, loving and uplifting. Unfortunately, it can be the people who believe in religion and abuse the name of religion that can cause the problems that we suffer under.

Hopefully this will a be a great reminder to us and to the rest of the nation that the LGBT people can embrace religion and that religion can embrace the LGBT people.

Recommended: Karen Ocamb's story on Glasspool's election.

Photo credit: Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times

D.C. Marriage Equality Rally Monday; Bishop Jackson Says There Will Be "Bloodletting" For Bill Passage

Maryland pastor Bishop Harry Jackson, who has crossed his state's line into Washington D.C. (to the chagrin of many) and has meddled in the capital's affairs to fight marriage equality, warned the D.C. Council of consequences for passing same-sex marriage resolution.

We're going to have to start earlier and take straw polls earlier. Our opposition had been working with these [council members] for five years. They'd invested time and money, and, to their credit, my opposition applied extreme political pressure on 30 or 40 people in the city, in the mayor's office and the city council.

But they have not changed ordinary people's opinions. It's a faux change. For instance, they created a gay organization of clergy. Our side has done the opposite, mobilizing a grass-roots effort with 1,200 churches in D.C.

In future races, religious people are going to start going after people's political careers. In D.C., some very vulnerable black councilmen went along with the city council, and some of these guys will not be sitting in those chairs in 2010 elections. Many in our coalition are wising up, looking for candidates. Political action committees are going to be formed. You're going to see a bloodletting that is going to mark a new style of engagement for people who are against same-sex marriage.

Bloodletting? What is this, the Crusades? On top of that, Jackson had been investigated into whether or not he changed his home address to avoid the criticisms of him not even being a D.C. resident.

I read a comment that he and his congregants cross into D.C. on Sunday for church services, their cars with their Maryland license plates crowding residential streets. These are the people who don't want marriage equality, not necessarily the D.C. residents, the people he's "fighting for" to vote on the issue.

Council member Marion Barry, one of two who voted against marriage equality, also has an interesting fact about his ward.

So far in D.C., 36 hate crimes have been reported in 2009, about the same rate as 2007 and 2008; however, a far majority of these have been based on sexual orientation - 31 as of September, 35 as of December.

Numbers can be debated. But one number can not: the rise in sexual orientation hate crimes in Wards 7 and 8 [police districts 6 and 7].

In 2008, 13 percent of sexual orientation hate crimes took place in these wards. So far in 2009, the number jumped to 32 percent.

On a side note, only two councilmembers---Yvette Alexander and Marion Barry---voted against the gay marriage bill. Who do they represent? Wards 7 and 8.

Interesting. You can make your own conclusions - don't want to jump for anyone else.

The first council vote on marriage equality was a success - another is scheduled for December 15 and is expected to pass. A rally is scheduled for Monday to show support.

WHAT: Rally for DC Marriage Equality
WHO: Campaign for All DC Families, DC Clergy United, co-hosted by the Human Rights Campaign
WHEN: Monday, December 14 starting at 7:00 p.m. ET.
WHERE: Kennedy Recreation Center at 1401 7th Street, Washington D.C. 20001

Catholic Charities Will Continue Work in D.C. Despite Marriage Equality Advancement

Well, I guess it was an empty threat, and the D.C. Council called their bluff.

Catholic News Agency reports:

The Archdiocese of Washington D.C. and Catholic Charities are still “committed to continuing to serve the people of the District of Columbia as we have done for more than 80 years,” despite D.C. Council members voting in favor of same-sex “marriage” in the nation's capital yesterday.

Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese said in a statement yesterday that they will move forward “with the resources available to us,” though the current legislation could threaten to cut government funding of faith-based organizations, such as Catholic Charities, if they do not compromise their religious beliefs.

On Nov. 17, Archbishop Wuerl stated that the same-sex “marriage” bill would cause the city itself to withhold contracts and licenses since Catholic Charities and other religious institutions cannot comply with city mandates to “recognize and promote” it.

Gibbs continued to say in her statement that “as the legislation moves forward, the Archdiocese of Washington will continue its dialogue with the Council to seek a balance of interests in the legislation – that of the city council to legalize same sex marriage and that of religious organizations to protect religious liberties.”

"Black Day" For Marriage Equality in New Jersey

New Jersey's Star-Ledger isn't backing away from painting a bleak picture of marriage equality's prospects in the Garden State.

In a story issued today, they report that support for the marriage equality bill is plummeting, calling legislators "scared herd animals" who run from an issue even if only one of them get skittish.

"I can’t say I’m confident now," Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), a lead sponsor, told the Star-Ledger. "I think we still have a pretty good chance. But people are getting nervous and weak-kneed."

But this is all spin, says the story. Basically, the bill is dead.

"They’ve lost the momentum," says Sen. Kip Bateman, a Republican who once considered supporting the bill. "I don’t think it’s going to happen."

"So mark this as a black day for the cause of gay rights in New Jersey," reports the Star-Ledger. "Marriage equality was supposed to be the big prize, the final measure of respect, a sign that gay families were indeed equal under the law."

Why?

Despite valiant efforts from Garden State Equality, the state's largest LGBT advocacy group, the Catholic Church has flexed its mighty arm. They hold a lot of sway with the legislature since 40% of New Jersey is Catholic.

Not only did church leadership have its priests throughout the state give the same homily on the same Sunday against same-sex marriage, the bishops recently had their priests read and distribute a letter denouncing marriage equality and instructing parishioners to pray that the state legislature would not vote on the bill. 150,000 parishioners signed a petition in opposition.

New Jersey Bishop Letter Against Marriage Equality

(See a Catholic Church bulletin at Good As You)

On top of this, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has made its presence known in New Jersey for some time, recently launching an ad campaign against the marriage bill. Also, a turn in the polls against marriage equality, an about face from past support, has also shook up politicians as well as the ouster of pro-marriage equality Gov. Jon Corzine. Governor-elect Chris Christie is adamantly against LGBT rights.

The loss in Maine, a very secular state, also appears to be the death knell for many advances in marriage equality in other states.

When Senate president-elect Steve Sweeney indicated that the senate should focus on economic issues, despite the fact that the senate has no economic bills to consider, it was a signal to the rest to drop support.

"Politicians better realize the gay community is looking around and taking note as to who is supporting advancement of our equality and who is just saying one thing and doing another," Timothy Beauchamp of AmericaBlog writes. "It isn't a threat. It's a promise."

"Many of us in the progressive movement just want to throw up," says Steve Goldstein of Garden State Equality. "Democrats put out one hand out to ask for money, and with the other they stab you in the back."

ACTION: The door is not officially closed on the bill. Go to Garden State Equality and find out how you can help get the bill to the senate floor.

They have also announced a lobby day.

At the direct request of state legislators who support marriage equality, Garden State Equality and our organizational allies are doing another lobby day -- on Thursday, December 3rd in Trenton beginning at 8:00 am.

Thursday, December 3rd at 8:00 am, we'll meet at Garden State Equality's office at 110 West State Street in Trenton, across from the State House. From there we'll do a public march to the State House, where we'll have a hospitality room to serve free breakfast and then free lunch.

We're now at the tipping point of history: Every event we do must have unbelievable turnout, just like the previous lobby day that influenced legislators tremendously. That's why legislators have requested we do another. Please attend if you possibly can.

Forward this email to your family, friends and congregational and organizational colleagues, and to any blogs and list servs of which you are a member.

Questions? Contact Hannah Johnson, Garden State Equality's Field Director, at Johnson@GardenStateEquality.org or cell (920) 222-1878.

Will Catholic Bishops Begin to Use Sacraments As Weapons Against Pro-LGBT Politicians?

UPDATE 11/25/09: Washington Post article, "Clergy abuse victims criticize RI bishop."

Original Post, 11/24/09

In what Sen. Patrick Kennedy has admitted was a long time coming, Bishop Thomas Tobin of Rhode Island wrote the Catholic senator an email informing him that he will not be allowed to partake of the Eucharist, or what is commonly known as Communion, because of his support of reproductive rights, in particular when it comes to health care reform.

In a statement issued Sunday, Tobin made known he informed Kennedy in February 2007 that it would be "inappropriate" for him to continue receiving the fundamental Catholic sacrament, "and I now ask respectfully that you refrain from doing so."

MSNBC reports:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Bishop Tobin appeared on Chris Matthews and got a lashing.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The bishop is not deterred. The most recent development occurred Tuesday morning on a Rhode Island radio show on which Bishop Tobin appeared.

"If [Sen. Kennedy] cannot abide by the teaching of this church, not just this one but others and ... what it means to be a Catholic ... maybe he should find another fine Christian denomination where he can be more comfortable," the bishop said.

Bishop Tobin also has the ear of Rhode Island Gov. Carcieri, who is a member of the anti-LGBT National Organization for Marriage and, in a move many criticized has heartless, recently vetoed the bill that would have given domestic partners the right to make burial arrangements for each other.

But can we honestly be surprised that this is the direction that Catholic Church leadership is headed? Strong-arming politicians to craft secular law to reflect church law?

Patrick Kennedy told the Providence Journal that Tobin had barred him from receiving communion and instructed priests in the diocese not to administer the sacrament "because of the positions that I've taken as a public official."

Naturally the question arises, "What public policy positions will the church hound policy makers on next? Marriage equality?"

Michael Jones at Change.org says, "It was a narrowing of Catholic theology to strip issues like poverty and social justice from the forefront of the Church, and replace them with opposing abortion, gay marriage, and stem cell research. It was also a call to Catholic politicians: oppose abortion and gay marriage at all costs, or risk the threat of the Church denying you Communion and publicly tarring and feathering you as a sinner."

And he's right. The Archdiocese of Washington D.C. threatened to throw the poor and homeless under the bus, claiming they will end their charity work if the District City Council passed their same-sex marriage legislation.

Let's not forget to that they are issuing a new edict that will be signed by hundreds of U.S. Bishops that will strongly unite them all behind a common statement condemning the love between gays and lesbians. Behind this they can rally and step into public policy making more than ever before.

Moreover, the church has pledged $2 million to fight marriage equality, despite closing parishes left and right due to lack of funds.

More recently, some Bishops signed onto the Manhattan Declaration with a swath of excitable, anti-LGBT evangelicals. The Declaration in part states, “We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence."

Even more, “We will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent.”

What's shocking is the church leadership's blatant intimidation and misuse of the Eucharist, one of the most sacred rites of Catholicism, in an attempt to force upon those with the hefty responsibility of writing secular law what the Church believes should be the law all U.S. citizens must abide by.

Are we to see next Catholic members of Congress strong-armed by their bishops to vote against the Respect for Marriage Act? Are we to see politicians blackmailed into voting against ENDA? Will the bishops manipulate these policymakers by using their beliefs of salvation by threatening their very souls?

This is exactly why Thomas Jefferson wrote of the need for the separation of church and state - to avoid this very wrong and morally corrupt yet powerful tactic that history has witnessed those in a position of religious power use time and time again.

Thankfully, Sen. Kennedy is not easily jolted by Tobin's blatant tar and feathering of his soul, but we all know many politicians are not as steadfast and grounded, their religious beliefs scaring then into manipulating hands of bishops.

The best we can do is keep on top of the church and watch their every move, and when we see them strike, we back up our allies in Congress.

Putting aside whether or not you're religious, I would hope that you would agree that no religious member of Congress should be manipulated into fearing for their salvation simply because they're doing their job.

RELATED: Republicans may now face losing funding from their party if they support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. It appears the GOP is taking tips from the Catholic church.

VIDEO: America's Best Christian Sets Her Critical Eyes on the Mormons

America's Best Christian, Mrs. Betty Bowers, calls out Mormons and schools all Americans on the unconstitutional craze of doling out civil rights by popular vote.

D.C. Officials Seek Faulty Compromise With Catholic Charities Over Marriage Equality

The Washington Post reports that some of the D.C. Council members and Del. Eleanor Homes Norton are looking for a compromise with the Archdiocese of Washington to find a way to avoid ending the Catholic Charities in the District while at the same time have legal same-sex marriage. Archbishop Wuerl threatened to close the public services if marriage equality was legalized in the capital.

D.C. officials believe a way can be found for Catholic Charities to continue operating under their current contracts with the District while at the same time have their gay employees be treated equally as their straight counterparts if they were to get married.

"The rights of [gay] partners cannot be any different from similar situated couples, but with that said, if other jurisdictions have found a way to accommodate Catholic Charities, that would be very much be desired," said Norton, who wants to avoid Congressional intervention.

While Norton has been doing her best to avoid Congress from intervening (and we really don't want that - lately, it doesn't appear many in Congress has a spine to stand up to the Catholic Church - Stupack Amendment anyone?), marriage equality champions Council members David Catania and Phil Mendelson have written directly to the Archbishop of Washington. I obtained a copy of the letter and will post below.

D.C. Council Members Letter to Archbishop

Susan Gibbs, spokesperson for the Catholic Church, told the Washington Post that the church was pleased to see the council members "finally responding" to their concerns, but that it may not be enough to alleviate the Church's fears of having to end their contracts and shut down public services.

I myself would be sad if the Church felt the need to close these services because they do in fact help many homeless and poor people get by day-to-day. However, I am not satisfied with the proposal given by council members because the solution they offer has to do with domestic partnerships and not necessarily with marriage (though I applaud the effort). And in this case particularly, you will be yet again relegating same-sex couples to a lesser status, but you would also have to do this to employed straight couples. Not very good.

On top of this, the fact that's really itching at the back of my brain is that the Catholic Church has declared full on war with marriage equality throughout the nation.

Back in August I reported on the Church's plan to put aside $2 million to fight marriage equality nationwide, even letting several parishes in Maine close rather than to give up this fight.

Yet this same Church cries foul when they're held to the same standards as any other business receiving public funds. They say they shouldn't be forced to follow discrimination laws because of their beliefs, and if they choose not to receive public funds anymore so they can continue to discriminate, then they'll be forced to close because they won't have enough money to function.

I say, Why not dip into the marriage war chest? Function as a private institution. Instead of using the $2 million to fight fellow citizens' rights, why not use it to do the good work you're already doing and let people live their lives as they see fit?

I'd have more respect for the Church if they did this than if they acknowledged my relationship in a compromised form. Don't want to acknowledge a gay employees' marriage? Don't hire gay employees! As a religious institution, they're exempt (in many circumstances) and able to do so.

As long as they're not receiving government funds.

Ah, but there's the rub. It's about the money.

Gibbs, the church spokesperson, seems to agree with me about the domestic partnership angle of the council members' proposal. She said that Archbishop Wuerl was reviewing the council members' letter, but church staffers wonder how the council can equate domestic partnership in San Francisco with same-sex marriage. See, even the church knows the two categories are not equal. She noted that the District has a domestic partnership law but that the Church is not covered by it.

And the dance continues.

Christian Leaders Present Manifesto Against Marriage Equality in Desperate Attempt for Political Influence

So do you remember that hefty statement that's being prepared by U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference which will condemn same-sex marriage? Well, the conservative evangelicals saw this and decided they wanted something similar for themselves.

More than 150 Christian leaders, most of them conservative evangelicals with a smattering of traditionalist Roman Catholic bishops, issued a joint 4,7000-word declaration Friday called “The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience." It reaffirms their opposition to abortion and marriage equality and pledges to protect religious freedoms, referencing Martin Luther King Jr.'s "A Letter from a Birmingham Jail" as a call to civil disobedience.

Signatories include 15 Roman Catholic bishops, including New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan and Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl; Focus on the Family founder James Dobson; National Association of Evangelicals president Leith Anderson; seminary leaders, professors and pastors.

“We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence,” it says.

Even more, “We will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent.”

But you see, this is exactly what they want. Though it's far from the truth that they'll be forced to do any of these things (hence, the separation of church and state the protection of religious freedom), they want their followers to the believe the end times are nigh, which encourages drastic actions and behavior. (Remember the Bush years? He led them into what they were hoping was their Armageddon - it just ended up being the trap that is the Iraq War.)

Craig von Buseck of the Christian Broadcasting Network (click at your own risk) compares the Manhattan Declaration to the Declaration of Independence, claiming just like the colonialists fighting the English, they have been pushed far enough by the "anti-family" and "anti-religious" movement and their religious freedoms are threatened to the point of necessary action.

"Today, Bible-believing Christians find themselves in an eerily similar situation as the activist Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the U.S. Federal Government move swiftly to deny religious liberties, and impose a radical anti-family, anti-Christian agenda upon the people of America," says von Buseck.

"Christian leaders today have arisen to echo the words of the colonial patriots, 'You have pushed us far enough. We will be pushed no further.'"

Ah, but see, these Christians are themselves guilty of breaking the vows of marriage and committing a multitude of other sins. Some of them have even had "relations" with members of the same sex. But they have a way around that, writing in the manifesto:

"We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage and to model for the world the true meaning of marriage. Insofar as we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce and remained silent about social practices that undermine the dignity of marriage we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same."

So they confessed, they're absolved and are now free to strip the rights of others away in the name of their faith.

Oh, and they also rely on the old adage that allowing same-sex marriage will allow legalized polygamy and incest.

"We understand that many of our fellow citizens, including some Christians, believe that the historic definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is a denial of equality or civil rights . . . the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential."

This does make sense. It really does. My not having a choice about my sexual orientation, something that the American Psychological Association confirms that I cannot change, but my conscious decision to be with only one person in a monogamous relationship is equivalent to a man or woman making the conscious choice to have more than one partner - They can't control themselves! They MUST have more than one spouse! They were born that way! So therefor must be legally recognized!

As for incest - c'mon, really? I do feel awful for those who have been abused in such a way or have fallen for a family member or are the shunned offspring of such a union, but comparing my relationship to these damaging circumstances is offensive.

But I'm not saying anything new here. And neither are they. All they're doing is trying to rally their troops and recapture the glory of their Bush years. We all know well they don't like it when other opinions are voiced as loudly as theirs and are actually considered!

The New York Times says, "They want to signal to the Obama administration and to Congress that they are still a formidable force that will not compromise on abortion, stem-cell research or gay marriage. They hope to influence current debates over health care reform, the same-sex marriage bill in Washington, D.C., and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation."

"They say they also want to speak to younger Christians who have become engaged in issues like climate change and global poverty, and who are more accepting of homosexuality than their elders," the Times continues. "They say they want to remind them that abortion, homosexuality and religious freedom are still paramount issues."

Which is ironic. Because they believe God gave us the Earth to take care of, Bush their hero is from an oil family, oil and the burning of oil causes global warming, global warming is effectively destroying the planet and could ruin the very world God bequeathed to us, but priorities people! DON'T LET THE GAYS MARRY OR WE'LL BECOME EXTINCT!

But I know full well not all Christians, Catholic and Protestant, feel this way. Many support marriage equality, encourage health care reform and believe that President Obama has our nation's best interests at heart. These I view as true Christians, who love their neighbor as themselves. These are true people of faith.

These manifesto Christians are political mongers desperate to stay relevant and to keep their political power. And all I have to say to them - "Oops, your hypocrisy is showing."

Manhattan Declaration

D.C. Marriage Equality Opponents File Lawsuit in an Attempt to Force Prop-8 Style Ballot Measure

Marriage equality opponents Bishop Harry Jackson and conservative group Alliance Defense Fund have filed a lawsuit against the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics who ruled Tuesday that a Prop 8-style initiative called the "Marriage Initiative of 2009", which would have defined marriage as between one man and one women for the District, could not proceed.

“The people of D.C. have a right to vote on the definition of marriage,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks in their press release. “The D.C. Charter guarantees the people the right to vote, and the council cannot amend the charter for any reason, much less to deny citizens the right to vote. ADF will defend the right of the residents of our nation’s capitol to participate in a legitimate democratic process in the district.”

They're claiming that they are defending the rights of voters. Hmm . . . defending the rights of some to take away the rights of others. Brilliant logic!

In July, Bishop Jackson attempted to get an initiative started to thwart the District's bill to recognize legal same-sex marriage performed outside its borders. Both the board and DC Superior Court Judge Retchin ruled against them, basing their decision on the District's Human Rights Act which bars discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Today the Washington Post released a profile on Bishop Jackson, in which he admits that he always knew that the battle of the new bill to legalize marriage equality within D.C. itself would head to the Superior Court. "The Lord is in all this," the bishop claims. "All over the country, it's evident that the strategy of the radical gay movement is to work the courts and legislatures. It's gonna be a knock-down, drag-out legal situation."

This should raise some red flags. Back in July, when the bishop and fellow opponents lost their case in D.C.'s Superior Court, they opted out of appealing to the D.C. Court of Appeals. Yet it seems clear that they intend to this time and this could be biggest hurdle facing the District's marriage bill.

Back in 1995, it was this court that ruled in Dean vs. the District of Columbia against granting a gay couple a marriage license. Yet Superior Court Judge Retchin stated in her July ruling, "The Court in Dean did not consider whether the government could refuse to recognize the legal right of persons to remain married solely because of their sexual orientation. In fact, the Court in Dean could not have addressed this issue because when Dean was decided in 1995, no state had legalized same-sex marriage."

Hopefully the D.C. Court of Appeals agrees.

Further into the Washington Post piece, Bishop Jackson reiterates the illogical conclusions that the high crime and divorce rates in the African American community, which he claims undermines traditional family values, is due largely in part by abortions and gay marriages.

"I don't know of anybody black who says, 'I hate gay people.' We're more accepting generally. But you overlap that -- homosexuality and gay marriage -- with broken families, and we don't know how to put it back together."

OK. So my desire to marry my fiance is going to destroy family after family? My desire to have a family of my own is going to rip apart other families in D.C. and other parts of the country because . . . well, he doesn't really say. I understand that many men in the African American community are on the down-low, which sadly has caused many problems, including broken families and the spread of HIV. But this problem is completely separate from out gay couples wanting to make a lifetime, legally recognized commitment to their relationship. The bishop continues with some shoddy spinning by quipping that redefining marriage redefines family, which will send the black culture into a free fall.

But what the bishop ignores is the fact that same-sex couples have existed for thousands of years, and they have had families this entire time. Where's the destruction of society? Just because the LGBT civil rights movement has made the country more aware of their existence, doesn't mean they suddenly appeared out of nowhere and are a new, impending threat to what he calls "traditional values."

And if I remember correctly, we're not the ones that redefined marriage in the law books of 31 states as "between one man and one woman." Before, this distinction wasn't made, which is why same-sex couples demanded marriage certificates and why the courts ordered they be given. It took anti-LGBT forces to redefine the legal, civil definition of marriage, to actively bar LGBT citizens from marrying.

Just saying.

New Report Shows That Gay Priests Not More Likely to Molest Than Straight Counterparts

In September the Vatican tried to shift the blame of the pedophilia problem plaguing its priests on gays. The Guardian reported, "In a defiant and provocative statement, issued following a meeting of the UN human rights council in Geneva, the Holy See said the majority of Catholic clergy who committed such acts were not paedophiles but homosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent males."

However, the AP reports that a preliminary study commissioned by the the U.S. Roman Catholic Bishops has found this statement to be false and that gay priests are no more likely to molest children than their straight counterparts.

"What we are suggesting is that the idea of sexual identity be separated from the problem of sexual abuse," said Margaret Smith of John Jay College, in a speech to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "At this point, we do not find a connection between homosexual identity and the increased likelihood of subsequent abuse from the data that we have right now."

-------

At the meeting Tuesday, Bishop Edward Braxton, of the Diocese of Belleville, Ill., asked the researchers whether their study indicated that homosexuality should be considered when evaluating a candidate for the priesthood. In 2005, the Vatican issued a policy statement that men with "deep-seated" attraction to other men should be barred from the priesthood.

Smith said: "If that exclusion were based on the fact that that person would be more probable than any other candidate to abuse, we do not find that at this time."

The AP also reports that experts on sex offenders reject any link between sexual orientation and committing abuse and that one should approached incidents by examining the offender and the victims they had available to them.

The final report won't be finished until the end of next year. But so far, it does indicate that the rate of abuse has declined steadily since the 1980s and that the peak was in the 1960s and 1970s. Cases arising today usually deal with incidents that occurred decades ago. Nearly 14,000 molestation claims have been filed against Catholic clergy since 1950 and abuse-related costs paid out by the church have reached a minimum $2.3 billion in the same period.

Though I do have a lot of issues with the Catholic leadership, it is a positive sign that they're looking into this problem within their ranks. However, the study is obviously not giving them the results they were hoping for. The true test comes after the report is finished and how the Vatican reacts to continue to address this serious problem. Maybe now they can stop trying to shift the blame and address the issue.

VIDEO: CNN Reports on Dispute Between Catholic Church and DC Over Marriage Equality

Recently, the Archdiocese of Washington threatened to end all of its charitable work in the District of Columbia if marriage equality is passed. Father David O'Connell, President of the Catholic University America, appeared on CNN to address the issue.



A few choice quotes from Father O'Connell:

"The archbishop of Washington and the staff of the office of the archdiocese of Washington has indicated as late as yesterday that it has no intention to stop serving the needs of the people of the archdiocese of Washington, especially the poorest of the poor."

"[Marriage equality in D.C.] will force us or put us into a situation where we may be at legal risk because of our own teachings and the beliefs that we experience and express that do not allow us to engage in some of the activities that are supported or promoted in the legislation."

"[The Church] will do its best to continue as usual. The legislation puts our relationship with the District of Columbia at risk, and that's the issue. It's not that we want to do this, that we need to do this, that we have to do this. We can't represent something that goes against our core beliefs, and this is an issue that is part of our core beliefs."

The last sentence is a head scratcher. It sounds like a bit of subtle backtracking but not really. In other words, he says they don't want or have to do this. So why do it?

VIDEO: Dolly Parton Declares Her Support for Marriage Equality

Joy Behar refers to Parton's religious background and asks whether or not she supports marriage equality.



The singer joked: “I always say, ‘Sure, why can’t they get married? They should suffer like the rest of us do."

Recently, mega-pastor from Texas, Joel Osteen, recently appeared on The View, another show Behar co-hosts. The evangelical declared that gays were "not God's best work."

Behar asked Parton her thoughts on what Osteen said to which she replied she did not usually discuss the issue in that much depth but added: "I think God made us who we are and how we are and I don't think that if he was a religious person, that he would be judging people."

Catholic Church Threatens to End All Its Public Services if D.C. Passes Marriage Equality

This comes as no surprise to me.

The Catholic Church in Washington D.C. has threatened to pull out of all social services in the District if the City Council moves forward with the currently proposed marriage bill. Their concerns stem from the fact that though they will be exempt from having to provide wedding day services, they will be forced to recognize the relationships afterward through employee spousal benefits and other consequences of marriage equality.

Such a threat if followed through could affect tens of thousands of residents, reports the Washington Post, because of the assistance the church provides for adoption, homelessness and health care.

"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."

However, it appears to me that the Church's biggest problem is with existing legislation, the Human Rights Act, which demands that discrimination against gays and lesbians not be tolerated.

The church is not the dominant provider in the district for its charitable services, though if they pull out, it will have an impact. But WaPo is saying that the church's influence is limited, with the marriage bill's sponsor, councilmember David Catania, who claims to have been a big supporter of their charitable work, says he'd rather part ways with the Church than to give into their threats.

"If they find living under our laws so oppressive that they can no longer take city resources, the city will have to find an alternative partner to step in to fill the shoes," Catania said. He also told WaPo that the Catholic Charities was involved in only six of the 102 city-sponsored adoptions last year.

Marriage equality advocates are telling the paper that this is the first that such a heated falling out has occurred over a marriage bill and public services.

But this has been a long-time coming. Who doesn't remember the Yes on 1 campaign crying foul that a Catholic adoption agency in Massachusetts, which was receiving government funds, chose to shut down instead helping same-sex couples adopt?

It's the same thing here. What the church is really objecting to is LGBT citizens receiving equality and as a result, more standing in society. This forces the church to deal with them publicly instead of keeping the status quo, which is acting like the LGBT population doesn't exist (unless of course to use us as a scapegoat for pedophile priests).

The crux of the problem is that the existing Human Rights Act, which is separate from the marriage bill, already demands that the church offer its public services to all residents if these public services are receiving public money. I've already objected to the fact that the current religious exemptions in the marriage bill violate the Human Rights Act, but now that the church is demanding even more coddling and special treatment, they're beyond reproach.

Let's face it. The Catholic Church will soon argue itself into non-relevance, exposing its hypocrisy to the point where society will have no interest in any of the actual good that it performs. Which is a shame because Jesus ordered that they feed the hungry and shelter the poor, something that the Church is good at doing. Jesus didn't say anything about gays or lesbians. Unfortunately, the Church has interpreted that as persecute and then ignore them.

So much for charity.

RELATED:

• WaPo - D.C. marriage bill draws eyes across the region
• Catholic Church Ready to Throw Homeless Under Bus in Order to Stop Gay Marriage

VIDEO: New York Sen. Ruben Diaz Faces Heat for His Opposition to Marriage Equality

Yesterday, I wrote about anti-LGBT New York Sen. Ruben Diaz and his vapid interview with the New York Times in which he attempts to defend his position of opposing marriage equality.

I've got gay family and friends, he exclaims. How can I be a homophobe? Since I already said my piece about his interview (and on his other ignorant actions against LGBT citizens), I'll let Nathaniel Frank at the Huffington Post say more.

Díaz never offers an argument against gay marriage. "The people of the nation don't want gay marriage," he told the Times. But then he argues the issue should not even come to a vote. If the people don't want equality, why shouldn't their representatives be able to express that will democratically, after debate, in the senate chamber? More to the point, why should the rights of a minority be granted only at the whim of a majority vote? Was it right in an earlier era to deny blacks and women equal rights just because the majority of the nation wished to do so?

-------

In addition to the majority tyranny argument, Díaz offers his Pentecostal religion as the reason for his effort to deny gay couples the right to marry. "My religion doesn't allow me to dance," he says, "but that does not mean I don't go to the party. My religion doesn't allow me to drink. But that doesn't mean I can't hang around with my friends. My religion is against gay marriage. It means, I don't agree with what you do. But let's go out. Let's go to the movies. Let's be friends."

Okay, where to start? It's fine, Senator Díaz, for you not to dance, but are you leading the effort to make dancing for others illegal? It's fine for you not to drink, but where is your fierce leadership on reviving that super popular and effective age of Prohibition? It's fine for you not to get gay-married, but why insist on denying others the rights you enjoy? And where is your outrage about all the Jews and Muslims and atheists who are legally allowed to get married even though, according to your religion, they're all going straight to hell? And where is your righteous effort to outlaw Jews' right to observe the Sabbath on the "wrong" day, or to keep Kosher? Might that seem a bit anti-Semitic? And maybe a bit absurd?

So, about this notion that you can ban others' rights because your religion "doesn't agree" with what they do: Have you ever given a moment of thought to how stupid this sounds? Millions and millions of people get married every year in this world. You have no idea what they all do and I bet you don't really care, so long as they're straight. But one thing you can be sure most of them do at one point or another is violate the tenets of their own (and your) religion. To be morally and intellectually consistent, don't you need to give a litmus test to all of them, about "what they do," to determine if you support their right to marry? Or just the gays?

But it wasn't just Hawthorne and me who were pissed yesterday. After it became apparent that the Senate was going to ignore the marriage bill AGAIN, some people had a few choice words for the senator as he left the chambers.



Like Hawthorne, I don't usually support the use of the word bigot against those who may feel they have valid reasons to vote against us. But in the case of Diaz, who can't seem to find a valid reason or even one that's masked in false logic, the word just may be appropriate.

VIDEO: Former Miss CA Carrie Prejean Discusses Her Sex Tape

The National Organization for Marriage's mouthpiece, Carrie Prejean, got caught in some hot water when TMZ discovered a sex tape of her. She finally discusses it.



Her main defense? Christians are not perfect. She claims she never was perfect and says so in her no book that she's desperately trying to sell.

Funny. She blames her ex-boyfriend sold the tape and exclaims, "People will do anything for money." Like write a book about a life no one cares to read about? And let a bigoted, anti-LGBT organization hire you as a pawn?

No, Carrie, we all know Christians aren't not perfect. That's what we've been saying all along. But we've also been saying that being a Christian isn't a hall pass for doing whatever you want (sex tapes, pre-marital sex) while condemning others and supporting the stripping of their rights.

Hypocrite.