09/03/2010
'The Call'? Oh here, it's for you, Courage Campaign
Tonight and tomorrow, this will happen:
And fortunately, our dutiful (masochistic?) pals over at the Courage Campaign will be on site live to cover the whole thing! Follow their constantly updated coverage here:
We're gonna also try to bring you as many sights and sounds and whatnots as possible. But not gonna lie: It's Labor Day Weekend, and this writer has a whole lotta summer breeze to suck up before I move on to long pants and pumpkin-flavored everythings. So don't waste too much time hitting that refresh key.
***
*FLASHBACK: At least Mike Huckabee's speaking from experience. Back in the early '70s, he was a youth attendee of Explo '72, which was kind of like "The Call" of its day:
Huck has quite a long reputation of "recruiting kids," huh?
***
**SEE ALSO: Sounds from 2008's pre-Prop 8 "Call": Eavesdropping on the 'The Call' [G-A-Y]
------------------
------------------
09/03/2010
Video:@SenGillibrand sits with, listens to booted soldiers. Something @[insert-GOP-repeal-foe] never does.
New CWA church insert: Aims at the heart, since the mind will surely be blown
The following Concerned Women For America church bulletin insert is not only offensive because of its aggressive tale of homosexuality needing to be "sacrificed to God" in the way that a father might theoretically sacrifice his son. But also look at the way they are pushing it on people:
[SOURCE]
"Aims at the heart"? "Demands a sincere response from anyone seeking to please God"? Of course they say all this while completely shutting out any scientific evidence or theological interpretation that diverges from their own faith-based biases. Oy!
Have a look at what CWA wants churches to tell congregants:
Tune in: Signorile, panel give late summer closet-cleaning advice
On today's edition of The Michelangelo Signorile Show" (Sirius 109/XM 98, 2-4PM ET), guests Mike Rogers, Michael Tripplett, and LZ Granderson will join the eponymous host for a discussion on "outing" in the age of Mehlman.
Full press release:
Seals: The deal
Democratic candidate from Illinois's 10th congressional district
*On the flip side: Dan's GOP opponent, Robert Dold, has come out for (un)constitutional bans on marriage equality.
From OMG! to O-your-G!: As millennials divorce church and state, elders seek Marriage Wars 2.0
So Lifeway Research, a Christian polling and data outfit, released a new report that says 61% percent of those Americans born between 1980-1991 are either somewhat or strongly accepting of same-sex marriage. Which even sounds low to us, knowing what we know about this generation. But again: Lifeway is a conservative evangelical firm, so -- yea.
Okay, so in this data, Lifeway also reported this finding:
“Two-thirds of those with no religious preference agree strongly there is nothing wrong with same-sex marriage, while only 1 in 7 of those who say they trust Christ as Savior agree strongly. Further, 46 percent of those who say they trust Christ as Savior strongly disagree and in fact find fault with marriage between members of the same gender.” [SOURCE]
Not a big surprise. While there are welcome exceptions, we pro-LGBT peeps know that the evangelical church is still our most reliably consistent well of opposition. Kids who are brought up in the church are typically injected with fear about LGBT people from the moment they start putting two Barbies together in one dream house. Anti-gay indoctrination is the all-too-reliable order of the evangelical day.
But the good thing about that: We LGBT activists and lawyers and varied equality voices are talking about CIVIL marriage equality. CIVIL. As in disconnected from the church by law. As in a custom where the religious ceremonial component is fully optional, but the CIVIL marriage license is a requirement (at least if the couple wants the state/fed. rights and benefits). Civil marriage, as in the institution that all heterosexual Americans experience now, with churches free to make whatever decisions they want in regards to the couples they will and will not marry or solemnize or recognize or chicken dance-erize. So in a perfect world, the above passage about evangelicals' personal faith-based feelings should not even come into play into the civil marriage conversation. Those feelings are for their own family, in terms of what weddings they will or won't attend and what gift registries they will and won't acknowledge, and their own church membership bodies, in terms of what weddings they will accommodate. We *FULLY* respect their right to make these decisions.
Unfortunately, the evangelical opposition is not willing to afford us the same respect. Here is Lifeway president Thom Ranier talking to Focus on the Family:
“It will be a critical issue for churches – soon to be led by Millennials – to establish their biblical positions on the issue of same-sex relationships,” he said. “If it is to find relevance with Millennials, the church must be willing to deal directly with the issue of same-sex attraction and relationships. The church must voice a clear, biblical ethic of sexuality.” [SOURCE]
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO! Here we have research that shows milliennials are more supportive of gay people's civil rights than any generation to come before (and again, we think the Lifeway data is still low). We also see, unsurprisingly, that evangelical Christians are one of the biggest sticking points (the survey also cites Men, African-Americans, and Southerners as greater resisters). But the man whose firm conducted this survey responds by saying that more church-infused opinion is the answer? That more condemnation of same-sex relationships is the way we handle gay people's placement within civil society? That more church injection into American politics is the answer, even while similar studies show that millennials are increasingly turned off by the church, with anti-gay attitudes cited as a reason why?
Just NO! What modern-day "culture warriors" like Mr. Ranier and Focus on the Family need/must do is realize/admit that their overwrought attempt to control civil law with personal faith is something that has wounded modern American politics/government! The Falwell era? Well, it may have Fared-well for a spell, but it ultimately FAILed-well too. It divided us deeply. The hand was overplayed, with the overreaching both exposing the inadequacies of the evangelicals' argument against LGBT people's rights, as well as raising questions among increasingly inquisitive younger generations about why, exactly, the church feels like it has any kind of right to set public policy in such a way. It is past time for the religious right to admit these mistakes, learn from these missteps, and move on to a more tenable position. A position that absolutely utilizes their own religious freedom to shout their anti-LGBT biblical interpretations with a ferocity, a right that we would theoretically join them in court in defending. But it's also a position that must stop acting as if all Americans, by virtue of birth, chose one of two options: (1) To willfully join their national church, or (2) sit quietly and doodle on the church bulletin while the national sermon shapes the constitution. Just like choir director Barbara Jean's reliably inedible covered dishes, this sort of forced national church fellowship is primed to spoil even before a young chuch-goer can complete the question, "aren't their homeless and hungry people who could use our time, energy, and funding?"
09/02/2010
Someday, putting gays' basic rights to ballot will be an editorial dealbreaker. Today's not the day
It's just a week and change away From D.C.'s 9/14 primaries, so the Washington Post has rolled out some more endorsements. Including this one:
In Ward 5, first-term council member Harry Thomas Jr. is facing challenges from Kenyan McDuffie, Delano Hunter and Tracey D. Turner. With the notable exception of the courage he showed in voting for marriage equality, Mr. Thomas has been a major disappointment. He pretty much defined his role as trying to stop anything -- no matter how sensible -- sought by the mayor. He led the effort to prevent school facilities chief Allen Y. Lew from overseeing park projects and has been the union's main champion in trying to thwart needed reforms in the schools and government workforce. Particularly distasteful was how he allowed racial demagoguery to derail the nomination of Ximena Hartsock as parks director.
Both Mr. Hunter, a community organizer with Brookland Manor, and Mr. McDuffie, a lawyer who worked in the Justice Department civil rights division, are better alternatives. We give the edge to Mr. Hunter, an engaging newcomer who is running a grass-roots campaign. He has an intimate knowledge of the needs of the ward and has smart ideas on how to tackle issues such as truancy and joblessness. Mr. Hunter is not a supporter of marriage equality, but he is not the homophobe his critics make him out to be, but rather someone who thinks there is a way to provide equality for gays while respecting the beliefs of religious groups. He said he would not seek to change the law.
D.C. Council endorsements [WaPo]
You all remember Delano Hunter, right? Ya know, he's the guy who the National Organization for Marriage is proudly featuring in these crude mailers:
[SEE FULL SIZE: Joe.My.God]
Oh, and not the mailer: Hunter was also at NOM's recent Summer Marriage Tour stop in D.C., as a show of support for an event where "let the people vote" was the rally cry of the day. Because "our values," in NOM speak, means a D.C. where every citizen gets a chance to utilize that whole "speak now or forever hold your peace" ceremonial line against any gay person's marital union, invited quest or not (although we really don't see peace-holding in the cards, even if they should lose such a vote).
So no, sorry WaPo. Failing to support marriage equality and acting as "the people" are owed a right to vote on civil rights may not be deal breakers for your editorial board's prevailing voices. And earning NOM's backing might strike you as just another political point. However, these are matters that go well beyond matrimony, stretching firmly into the realms of constitutional fairness, respect for minority populations, principles in the face of politics, and just plain human respect! Whether or not Mr. Hunter fits into a contrived "homophobe" box is not the issue here. But as for whether or not he understands that we all share this country and its set of civil laws, and that those same laws should not be rolled back by (typically faith-based) majority whims? Yea, well -- that's kind of a big deal.
**More from a trio of D.C. locals:
Chris Geidner: Post Endorses NOM's Nom in Ward 5 Council Race [Poliglot]
"First, the Post ed board has steadily supported marriage equality in the past. That's why it makes no sense to laud Councilmember Harry Thomas, Jr. for courage in voting for the marriage bill, then go on to laud Hunter for being "someone who thinks there is a way to provide equality for gays while respecting the beliefs of religious groups."
Adam Bink: Muddying the waters on equality [Open Left]
"Now, it may not matter to the Washington Post who Hunter chooses to pal around with, but it does to the LGBT community. NOM has chosen Hunter to be its shining example of how to defeat pro-marriage incumbents."
Joe Sudbay: Wash. Post endorsed NOM-backed candidate for City Council [AmericaBlog]
**CONTACT: letters@washpost.com
2010: The year of the anti-gay vans
The NOM Summer Bus Tour might be over. But don't think you're done with anti-gay road trips, kiddies. Because come early fall, another group will gas up a big wrapped vehicle for the purposes of slighting certain kinds of people:
