Jamie Pedersen, Representative from Seattle, stated “I would like for our four children … to grow up understanding that their daddy and papa have made the kind of lifelong commitment to each other. Marriage is the word we use in our society to convey that idea.”

Currently, same-sex marriage is legal in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington DC. It is also being considered in several states. California may end up having same-sex marriage again soon after the courts ruled Prop 8 Unconstitutional. Maine is set to vote on an initiative in November that could grant same-sex marriage.

Via MSNBC

The Civil Rights Agenda executive director Anthony Martinez stated “We at TCRA supported the Civil Union bill as an initial step to providing rights and benefits to same sex couples, but separate is never equal. Marriage has always been one of the principal goals for our organization and we are pleased to finally be able to move forward towards achieving that goal. We thank the leadership of Representative Harris, Cassidy and Mell, and look forward to supporting their efforts. TCRA will work tirelessly to ensure that Illinois recognizes that all families deserve to be equal.”

Washington State is also voting on marriage equality this year, and it is likely to pass their Assembly later this month.

Christie laughably called this the “bargain of their life”.

Christie, at a town hall meeting in Denville, NJ, stated “I’ve called upon every Republican in the state legislature to vote to put it on the ballot. Well, you need three-fifths to put it on the ballot. The Republicans have two-fifths in the legislature. So that means the Democrats only need to come up with one-fifth of the legislature. This is the bargain of their life. I’m giving you two-fifths! And the polls they show me say that if it goes on the ballot, it will lose. How much more magnanimous can I be? What else do you want me to do? Go campaign for it too? Look, I’m doing the best I can here!”

Christie has been trying to make the case that same-sex marriage should be put to a popular vote, including taking the step of claiming that Civil Rights leaders would have longed to have Black rights put up for a vote. It was later pointed out by a variety of people, including Representative John Lewis of Georgia, that Civil Rights leaders were opposed to referenda being used and knew that only a legislative solution was viable. Christie had to back down, but refuses to back down on this issue.

The rights of the minority have never been put to a popular vote. Had the Founding Fathers put the rights of Catholics to a vote, it would have been rejected. People were still, broadly, hostile to Catholics right up until the mid-1950′s, and there are still people who oppose Catholics having rights even today. Putting Black rights up to a vote in the 1950′s and 1960′s would have been a debacle.

New Jerseyites broadly support same-sex marriage in polling, but that does not mean that a ballot initiative would succeed in granting marriage rights to same-sex couples. Christie is hostile to same-sex marriage rights, instead, choosing to be heavy handed and dictatorial in his decision to push government into the lives of its citizens.

Via Huffington Post

They write:

“This bill is clearly intended to restrict the Constitutional liberties of gay, lesbian and bisexual service members, said Paul Dodd, retired Army chaplain and co-chair of the Forum. “Not only does it target some of our military heroes, it seeks to disenfranchise hundreds of law abiding chaplains who choose to minister to all service members and their families, regardless of sexual orientation.”

The proposed legislation would prevent chaplains from performing same-sex ceremonies in military chapels, which traditionally serve military members from many denominations.

“In the words of retired Army Chief of Chaplains, Major General Doug Carver, they are to be ‘A house of prayer for all people!’” noted Dodd. Dodd served 31 years in the Army Chaplaincy, including a tour as Command Chaplain for the Army Medical Command.

Army veteran and ordained Christian minister Rev. Elder Ken Martin, of Metropolitan Community Churches, called this latest attack “redundant, inflammatory and demagoguery,” insisting that chaplains who “wish to perform same gender marriages in military chapels should have every right to do so.”

Rev. Stephen Boyd, Minister for Chaplains and Specialized Ministers for the United Church of Christ, said “This bill is redundant. The rights of chaplains are already insured.”

The Santa Fe City Council has already approved a resolution opposing the ban. The resolution was introduced by Councilwoman Patti Bushee.

Jacob Candelaria, the president of Equality New Mexico, stated “The Santa Fe City Council stood with New Mexico families last night, and sent a clear message to legislators: that in New Mexico we celebrate diversity, we respect our neighbors, and we value our families. All of our families.”

Candelaria also hopes that lawmakers will go back to focusing in on issues that matter to the people of New Mexico saying “My sincere hope is that all legislators, including Rep. David Chavez, will spend their time focusing on what matters most to New Mexicans: education, jobs, and the economy.”

Via OnTopMag

Last year, the same-sex marriage passed in the Senate, but failed in the House. Christian Conservatives objected to the bill, and threatened to take it to a voter referendum.

O’Malley also said that religion should not influence civil rights laws saying “We’re all very diverse and that’s what makes us strong, but religion should never play a part in what the laws of our state are, and that’s what we’re trying to convey to religious leaders who are opponents of the bill.”

Via Ontopmag

Sentamu believes that marriage must remain heterosexual in nature and said:

“I don’t think it is the role of the state to define what marriage is. It is set in tradition and history and you can’t just (change it) overnight, no matter how powerful you are.

“We’ve seen dictators do it in different contexts and I don’t want to redefine very clear social structures that have been in existence for a long time and then overnight the state believes it could go in a particular way.

“It’s almost like somebody telling you overnight that the Church, whose job is to worship God, (will become) an arm of the Armed Forces. They must take arms and fight. You’re completely changing tradition.”

Of course, in 1534, Henry VIII, with a snap of his fingers practically, changed tradition saying that he and not the Vatican was the head of the Church. That brought to an end more than a thousand years of power that the Vatican had over people and sparked the Reformation and lead to the creation of the Anglican Church.

The Daily Mail notes:

The Government will open a consultation on its marriage reform bill in March, but the Church of England has already warned that same-sex couples will be able to have church weddings if David Cameron goes ahead with the plans.

The Church’s lawyers last month said that weddings will have to be offered to same-sex couples under any scheme to open the full privileges and title of marriage to gays and lesbians.

Sentamu said that the rebellion would come from within the House of Lords as well as the House of Commons saying:

“The rebellion is going to come not only from the bishops. You’re going to get it from across the benches and in the Commons.

“If you genuinely would like the registration of civil partnerships to happen in a more general way, most people will say they can see the drift. But if you begin to call those marriage, you’re trying to change the English language.

“That does not mean you diminish, condemn, criticise, patronise any same-sex relationships because that is not what the debate is about.

“The Church has always stood out – Jesus actually was the odd man out. I’d rather stick with Jesus than be popular because it looks odd.”

The current government lead by Prime Minister Cameron, though, has different thoughts regarding the whole issue of marriage. Cameron said last October that “Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other. So I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I’m a Conservative.”

Liberal Democratic Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone has stated that there will be nothing out there to force churches to hose same-sex ceremonies.

Peter Tathell, coordinator of the Equal Love campaign stated:

“Archbishop Sentamu is a religious authoritarian who wants to impose his personal opposition to same-sex marriage on the rest of society. It is not a Christian value to demand legal discrimination against gay couples and to treat them as inferior, second-class citizens – with fewer rights than everyone else. The Government is proposing to legalise same-sex civil marriages in register offices. This will not affect churches. The Archbishop has no valid grounds for objecting to civil legislation that will ensure marriage equality for all couples.”

Whether or not Great Britain gets same-sex marriage is likely not the reason why Sentamu is up in arms over same-sex marriage. Of greater concern is how African and Carribean Anglicans will react to the news.

According to Brian Brown, president of NOM, “NOM intends to vigorously fight this attempt by same-sex marriage advocates to impose gay marriage in Maine. Maine voters rejected gay marriage barely more than two years ago. What part of ‘no’ don’t gay marriage advocates understand?”

Two years ago, Maine voters barely rejected a marriage equality law. NOM spent some $2 million to reverse the law. Currently, 54% of Mainers support same-sex marriage, a reversal from two years ago.

OnTopMag notes:

“The people of Maine are not in favor of redefining marriage, as we showed in 2009,” Brown added. “Gay advocates are fooling themselves when they say things have changed. Voters still understand that marriage is about more than the desires of adults. They still understand that children need both a mother and father. They understand that same-sex marriage has real consequences for people of faith, small businesses, churches and religious organizations. And they understand that marriage is too important a social institution to be kicked to the curb to satisfy the political demands of a small but powerful and vocal special interest group. We are completely confident that Mainers will oppose this attempt, just as they rejected gay marriage in 2009.”

Unfortunately for Brown, things have changed rather drastically since 2009, and support for same-sex marriage is growing as people realize that he and his groups do little more than lie in order to try and push their points.

Advocates for marriage equality are returning to the ballot box in Maine. They have delivered more than 105,000 signatures in an effort to trigger a Citizens Initiative, which would enact a marriage equality law. This push comes after two years of outreach and education efforts in the state. Currently 54% of Mainers support marriage equality.

EqualityMaine executive director Betsy Smith stated that “The number of signatures we gathered and the thoughtful conversations we’ve been having with voters tell us that Mainers are eager to speak on this question again. Our polling shows a 54% majority of support for same-sex marriage in Maine. Many Mainers have changed their minds and want a chance to bring equality and fairness to our state.”

Pastor Michael Gray of Old Orchard Beach United Methodist Church said “I grew up in Maine and always considered myself a conservative guy, but I have taken a journey toward supporting marriage for gays and lesbians. I really struggled with the issue of same-sex marriage, but through study, prayer, and patience, I can gratefully say that my faith now informs me differently.”

Also quoted in the article is Janet Spencer of Glenburn who said “Having grown up in an era where homosexuality was not often discussed, I had never given much thought to whether gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to marry, but in the past couple years I’ve learned why it’s so important to them. I came to see that, if gay and lesbian couples share the same love and commitment that my husband and I have for one another, there simply is no alternative to being able to marry the person you love.”

The WhyMarriageMattersMaine article explains:

The title of the proposed Citizens Initiative is “An Act to Allow Marriage Licenses for Same-Sex Couples and Protect Religious Freedom.” The proposed ballot question wording submitted to the Secretary of State in June of last year reads as follows: “Do you favor a law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples, and that protects religious freedom by ensuring that no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs?”

Back in 2009, Maine passed marriage equality legislation only to have it be struck down by a People’s Veto. In the end, only 16,500 votes stood between those who voted ‘no’ and those who voted ‘yes’ on vetoing that law.

Elizabeth Warren

At a time when It Gets Better videos all tend to be flashy and almost campaign-y, former school teacher and current Senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren has issued a video that is very low key. Her video matches her personality in that it is simple and direct. In the video, Warren starts:

“I’m Elizabeth Warren, and you may be wondering what I have to say to you. After all, I haven’t lived your life. But when I graduated from college, I was a schoolteacher, and I watched what happens in hallways, on sidewalks, out in the schoolyard. I watched kids who pushed, who bullied. I saw how much pain some kids could inflict on other kids.”

The Constitution of the United States of America

It is not surprising that various religious movements are busy aligning to try and push the idea that their religious liberties are under assault even though they are not. The Rainbow Sash Movement issued this statement regarding a recent letter which is pushing this inane notion:

The Rainbow Sash Movement responds to the open letter religious leaders released today, including Catholic, Evangelical, Jewish and Mormon figures. The letter argues that the battle against same-sex marriage is a fight on behalf of religious freedom.

“Marriage and religious freedom are both deeply woven into the fabric of this nation,” clergy members wrote in their letter, “Marriage and Religious Freedom: Fundamental Goods That Stand or Fall Together.” It calls on all Americans to promote and protect marriage “in its true definition.”

The letter did recognize that it does not speak for a majority of religious bodies, but only those who signed the letter. Archbishop Dolan Cardinal Elect of New York was the only Catholic Archbishop to sign the open letter. He appeared to be doing it on his own and not representing the US Conference of Catholics Bishops.

What the signatures fail to understand is that they stand opposed to the views of other mainline religious bodies such the Episcopal Church in America, Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations and United Church of Christ who perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples as do independent Catholic Congregations spread throughout the country. Clearly there is division on this matter in the national faith community.

The issue of Marriage Equality will be fought out in the Courts, and in local state legislatures. The issue is not about religious freedom rather it is religious demagoguery in the face of an enlighten society. It is reason, not unreasonable positions which will rule the day. This open letter only highlights extremes the anti-Marriage equality religious groups will go to force their interpretation of marriage down everyone’s throats whether they like it or not. This is what happens when you listen to the fundamentalist wing of some religious bodies in this country. They could not get their way by bullying, now they are trying fabrication and claiming the sky is falling.

The Rainbow Sash Movement believes that reasonableness and fairness will eventually win out. Bigotry is a harsh term to describe another s actions whether religious or not. If the signers of this open letter don’t want to be described as a bigot perhaps they should stop acting like that are.

The Rainbow Sash Movement wishes to congratulate the three (3) Roman Catholic Bishops of Washington State for their silence on Gov. Christine Gregoire, a confirmed Catholic, for her stand supporting gay marriage. She follows in the footsteps of Governor Cuomo of New York, and Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois in aggressively pushing for marriage equality.

Unlike the Bishops of New York and Illinois the Bishops of Washington State appear to be fatigued arguing against reason and common sense.

We are also delighted that the Provincial General of the Jesuit Order has remained silent. This is the dawning of a new reality among part of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops to take a more realistic approach to the changing attitudes of American Catholics on the matter of Gay Marriage.

While religious fringe elements in the state of Washington are trying to promote hysteria to their credit the Washington State Bishops have remained silent. The new reality is there are a number of churches who sanction same-sex marriages or look the other way regarding such ceremonies.

Both the Jesuit Provincial and the 3 Washington State bishops we believe realize that they are being placed under the spot light of shifting public opinion concerning the matter of Marriage Equality in the State of Washington. The Bishops are wisely choosing to sit out this gay marriage debate.

The renewed push to legalize same-sex marriage has to do with the fact that New York has legalized same-sex marriage. Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver and Senate president Stephen Sweeney are on board with it.

Governor Christie has voiced his opposition to same-sex marriage, but he has also stated that his personal beliefs do not mean that the other Republicans have to vote against it. He told Piers Morgan back in June:

“I believe marriage is an institution between one man and one woman. I think it’s special and unique in society, and I think we can have civil unions that can help to give the same type of legal rights to same-sex couples that marriage gives them. But I just think marriage has as a special connotation. And I couldn’t see myself changing my mind on that.”

Some 180 diplomats gathered at the Vatican to hear Pope Benedict XVI declare that the education of children needed proper “settings” and that “pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman.”

“This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself,” he said.

The Vatican under the leadership of Pope Benedict XVI has waged an aggressive war against Gay Marriage. Country after country in Western Europe is embracing the notion of marriage equality and this is why he is hitting the panic button.

In the United States we have recently seen the elevation of two Archbishops to level of Cardinal not based on their pastoral abilities, but rather for their aggressive public opposition to Gay Marriage.

Cardinal elects Archbishop Dolan Archbishop of New York, and Archbishop O’Brien of Baltimore both men are known for their open opposition to marriage equality. Dolan’s notorious and seriously flawed leadership against Gay marriage in New York is credited for the Gay Marriage finally being passed.

While Archbishop O’Brien is trying to have a face-off with Maryland’s O’Malley, who is Catholic, and has come under criticism from O’Brien for his stand on the pending introduction of Gay Marriage legislation in Maryland, the Governor is standing his ground.

“I write to urge you to refrain from using the power of your office to promote the redefinition of marriage in Maryland,” O’Brien wrote to O’Malley. This reminds us of the standoff between Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois, and Govern Mario Cuomo of New York also Catholics, who stood on the side of marriage equality, and dismissed both the bishops and their supposedly moral leadership.

Meantime in Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota Archbishop Nienstedt is telling his priest when it comes to the Minnesota Catholic church’s campaign to pass a constitutional marriage discrimination amendment, they had two choices: help out or shut up:

Most recently massive public opinion turned against Cardinal Francis George of Chicago for referring to the gay liberation movement as morphing into the KKK. The Cardinal was forced to apologize for those remarks. He also just recently lost his statewide effort to promote discrimination by opposing Civil Unions and Gay adoption. He was further enraged by the fact that Catholic Charities adoption agencies had to abide by the Civil Unions law or they would be denied public tax payer funding. To our Catholic Shame the Illinois Catholic Conference did not have the adoptive child as their first priority, so they closed down their adoption agencies.

This Papal coordinated war appears to be losing ground globally not because the pro marriage equality forces are outsmarting the Bishops at every turn, but rather because they have reason and common sense on their side. This is a War the Papacy is bound to lose.

Here is the GLAAD statement about what the Vatican is doing:

On Monday, Pope Benedict XVI addressed a gathering of international diplomats, telling them that marriage equality threatens “the future of humanity itself.” His comments were billed by several media outlets as his strongest anti-LGBT comments to date.

Pope Benedict’s was quoted, “This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself.”

GLAAD reminds media outlets of the importance of informing audiences that the vast majority of Catholics are supportive of LGBT people, including on the issue of marriage equality, despite vocal opposition from Roman Catholic hierarchy. Recent polls have demonstrated that nearly three-quarters of American Catholics are supportive of LGBT people, including on marriage equality.

While the Pope and Roman Catholic hierarchy have been consistent in their opposition to LGBT equality, they are not in line with everyday Catholics who live, work, and worship with LGBT people in their daily lives.

However, whenever the Pope speaks, his words attract international attention. For this reason, it is important for media outlets to share and report how widely out of touch the Pope is with his own constituency.

GLAAD encourages journalists and members of the media who are reporting on the Pope’s comments to include recent polling data (see above) that shows the widespread support for the LGBT community among everyday Catholics. GLAAD also asks reporters covering the story in depth to speak with representatives of LGBT-affirming Catholic organizations. The organizations listed below have been working for a number of years, supporting and affirming LGBT people, their friends and families. GLAAD continues to call on the media to lift up stories and voices of LGBT-affirming Catholics who will likely differ from the hierarchy on issues of LGBT equality.

Archbishop John C. Nienstedt has stated that any priest who does not agree with the Church’s stance on a constitutional ban on marriage for same-sex couples had better just shut up and never talk in public. He said this in a private speech:

It is my expectation that all the priests and deacons in this Archdiocese will support this venture and cooperate with us in the important efforts that lie ahead. The gravity of this struggle, and the radical consequences of inaction propels me to place a solemn charge upon you all — on your ordination day, you made a promise to promote and defend all that the Church teaches. I call upon that promise in this effort to defend marriage. There ought not be open dissension on this issue. If any have personal reservations, I do not wish that they be shared publicly. If anyone believes in conscience that he cannot cooperate, I want him to contact me directly and I will plan to respond personally.

Various members of Progressive Catholic Voice are upset with Nienstedt. Paula Ruddy, a parishioner at St Boniface in Minneapolis, said “When I first read this letter I couldn’t believe that the Archbishop was telling priests and deacons to be silent if they were opposed to the marriage amendment. Is one’s position on whether the State constitution should be amended a matter of Church doctrine? How are Catholics to form their consciences if their pastors are not candid with them?”

Ruddy is on the board of Progressive Catholic Voice, and their editor Michael Bayly said “The Archbishop’s letter is problematic in many ways. As a gay man, I find it particularly offensive that he can’t even bring himself to name gay and lesbian people. We’re simply a ‘minority’ seemingly out to destroy the church and civilization. Such an absurd caricature would be funny if not for the hurtful and damaging consequences to individuals, couples and families resulting from the Archbishop’s anti-marriage equality activism.”

Minnesota’s Catholic Church hierarchy started to find itself under intense scrutiny over their support for the constitutional amendment.

Related articles

• MINNESOTA: Archbishop Tells Priests To Shut Up If They Oppose Anti-Gay Bill (joemygod.blogspot.com)

Rick Santorum, by Donkey Hotey

We have had this conversation before about Rick Santorum, back when he was in the U. S. Senate. He uses studies that relate to straight parents to defend his position on gay parenting. His newest one cites “one anti-poverty expert” who, according to Santorum, “…found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children’s lives.” The first time Santorum came to my attention, he was speaking on the Senate floor, weeping copiously, displaying charts created based on a couple of “studies.” The first was the infamous “Marriage in Scandinavia” That study alleged that the legalization of same sex marriage had adversely impacted straight marriage in “Scandinavia.” The study used statistics from the 1970s through the 1990s which did show a decline in marriage rates in Scandinavia. Problem is, The Netherlands isn’t in Scandinavia. Scandinavia consists of Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland. None of those countries had same sex marriage. They didn’t even have civil unions. The Netherlands had progressed, over a ten year period, through registered domestic partnerships and civil unions to same sex marriage. Their Bureau of Statistics said that there hadn’t been enough same sex marriages to draw any statistical conclusions about their impact.

The second study Santorum used was about the effects of divorce and single parenthood in straight couples. Not a single same sex couple was profiled. That study did say that a child benefitted from having both a mother and a father. But it didn’t say anything about having two mothers or two fathers.

The studies that Santorum ignored were the ones that showed that same-sex parents waited to have children, were more financially stable (have to be, becoming a same-sex parent is expensive), were better educated, more emotional mature and really, really, really wanted that kid. They also showed that two parents, of any configuration, was better than one. Santorum is still ignoring those studies. They don’t fit with his narrative. They deny the necessity of men.

That is what this comes down to with Rick Santorum. The work that is being done now that could lead to the conversion of a human egg into the equivalent of a sperm is Santorum’s worst nightmare. If women could have babies without any contribution, natural or otherwise, from a man, what is the point of having men at all?

There is a new research brief, Childbearing Outside of Marriage: Estimates and Trends in the United States, that shows that more women are having babies outside of marriage. It’s just the kind of study Rick Santorum loves. The right wing is pushing the study to show that single motherhood is a public concern because “it is linked to negative outcomes for women and their children across a range of measures, as well as with a reliance on public assistance.” Agreed, if all you look at is a teenager who got pregnant by accident and whose baby-daddy took a hike. But that conclusion ignores the increase in single motherhood among educated, financially stable women, older women, who have given up on trying to find a man and chosen to have a family instead. Add in the single women who adopt, like Diane Keaton and Sandra Bullock, and you have a whole other picture. It is also worth looking at the way “staying together for the sake of the children” no longer works as a reason to stay in a bad marriage, unless there is some deficiency in the wife – lack of education, lack of resources, psychological factors. Women are coming to the conclusion that becoming a mother isn’t worth the investment in time, effort or commitment with a less-than-acceptable man.

Rick Santorum will continue to rail against gays and lesbians and same-sex parenting for two reasons. First, he’s deeply homophobic. He admits it, sort of. He acknowledges that the whole idea of gay makes him ill. That covers the gay men bashing. He hates lesbians because they prove that it is not necessary to have a dick to be an important person or raise great kids. Lesbians diminish Santorum’s level of importance in the world. They, and straight women who chose to be single parents, are making the statement that straight men need to prove themselves capable of something more valuable in society than spreading their seed. Jane is saying Tarzan should get an education and a decent job and stop sitting on the couch, drinking beer, watching “the game” and scratching himself.

On Friday, Santorum told an audience that “Marriage is not a right. It’s a privilege that is given to society by society for a reason. We want to encourage what is best for children.” Wrong. Marriage is a legal contract for the protection of property or to secure inheritance rights to a position. For centuries, women were told that marriage protected them. Not hardly. It denied them every imaginable freedom.

Somewhere in all the uproar over Rick Santorum’s positions on gay marriage and gay rights, his equating of homosexuality with beastiality and pedophilia, his insistence that gay marriage is a gateway to polygamy and marrying your dog, something important has gotten overlooked. Rick Santorum hates women. He doesn’t trust women to raise children, run a home, earn a living, lead productive lives without a MAN. In his view, women are only complete when they have a man and children are only valid if they have a male parent. He actually believes that having a rapist, drug dealer, murderer or psychopath for a father is better than being raised by a woman alone.

He’s politically savvy enough to understand that he can’t just come out and say that if he could he would strip women of their rights, but that’s what is lying just under the surface of his positions on family and children. He is 100% with St. Paul, who said that a man was the head of the household just as Christ was the head of the Church. Maybe that’s what he really meant when he said he was the “Jesus candidate” – he’s the person who thinks men are the earthly equivalent of Christ and are to be obeyed and followed in all things.

On a more earthly note…..

Now that Santorum is center stage, literally and figuratively, people are finally looking at his finances. He portrays himself as blue-collar, with an Italian immigrant coal-mining grandfather. Well, the grandfather part is true. Santorum’s raking in about $1.3 million a year as a member of the board of a health care company, a consultant for a Pennsylvania energy company and his work for a Washington lobbying firm. Not bad for a guy who, while in the Senate only made $165,000 in salary and $32,000 in book royalties. He is hardly the Washington outsider he says he is. He’s taken the path of least ethics since being defeated for re-election – he’s a paid lobbyist for those very interests that most hurt us – for-profit health care and over-priced energy.

Related articles

• Rick Santorum Argues with Students About Same-Sex Marriage and Polygamy: VIDEO (towleroad.com)
• Rick Santorum booed for suggesting gay marriage ‘harms’ children (topix.net)
• The Desperate Spin Of Rick Santorum (lezgetreal.com)
• ABC News video | New Hampshire college students boo Rick Santorum for anti-gay marriage stand (miamiherald.typepad.com)
• Santorum Tells Kids With Gay Parents: You’d Be Better Off With Parents In Prison (thinkprogress.org)
• Bill O’Reilly Questions Rick Santorum About His ‘Extreme’ Plans to Invalidate Same-Sex Marriage Licenses: VIDEO (towleroad.com)

About that one, Santorum back in February 2004, stated “This is an issue just like 9-11. We didn’t decide we wanted to fight the war on terrorism because we wanted to. It was brought to us. And if not now, when? When the supreme courts in all the other states have succumbed to the Massachusetts version of the law?”

So far, no one has died from lesbians and gays being allowed to marry, but it could be said that many lesbians and gays have died prematurely or had their lives made problematic by not being allowed to marry.

Back in 2003, Santorum said something even more inaccurate and the very thing that is haunting him now. Back then he stated “In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing.”

First of all, Santorum really should try doing more reading than the Bible and the back of a cereal box since there is documentation of same-sex marriage among numerous Native American tribes, and indications of same-sex marriage in early Christianity, under Celtic Brehonic law, and in several other cultures.

Of course, Santorum is now trying to say he never said this..

However, New York Mag notes that “since 2003, when Santorum made the comments, acceptance of gay rights and gay marriage has soared. Santorum hopes to become a viable, mainstream candidate, but his past remarks on homosexuality — not just opposition to gay marriage, but disparagement of gays in general — are no longer part of the mainstream. Best to just pretend they never happened.”

Here he is on CNN trying to walk back his statements:

Santorum also went on Bill O’Reilly’s show to try and burnish his image and make himself more mainstream. When confronted by O’Reilly about his recent statements about abortion, lesbians and gays in the military and same-sex marriage, Santorum said his views were not extreme and said “I don’t think being for marriage between man and a woman is extreme, Bill.” O’Reilly countered saying “To rescind licenses already given? That’s a big deal.”

And Santorum replied with “The federal government would have to pass a constitutional amendment and if the Constitution says that marriage is between a man and woman, then things that are inconsistent with that would not — would be inconsistent with the Constitution…”

He also tried to show how he has not be obsessed with the whole gay thing by saying “…this is the fundamental issue in this campaign is whether government is going to be big and obtrusive and telling people how to manage their — their lives or — and are they going to support the basic values of faith and family that allow government to be limited and allow our economy to be strong.”

Of course, Santorum wants the government to be big and intrusive- so long as it is big and intrusive in your bedroom and not, say, in the corporate boardroom.

H/T Towleroad
Via NY Mag
Via Mcall

Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia

It is not all together surprising that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s wife Diana Fine Cantor supports same-sex marriage. The two have been married for twenty-two years. On CBS’ 60 Minutes, Mrs Cantor was asked by Lesley Stahl about several social issues including abortion and same-sex marriage.

According to OnTopMag:

When Stahl asked, “So, you’re pro-choice,” Mrs. Cantor answered, “I am,” and nodded in the affirmative when asked, “Gay marriage?”

“What does that mean? You disagree with him?” Stahl asked.

“I do disagree,” Mrs. Cantor replied. (The video is embedded in the right panel of this page. Visit our video library for more videos.)

Mrs Cantor is not the only Republican spouse to support same-sex marriage. Laura Bush, the wife of George W. Bush, and Cindy McCain, wife of John McCain, both support same-sex marriage.

via Wikipedia

Ricky Martin is not getting married in Spain. That has been the rumor for some time, but he has routinely denied it. Instead, he plans on marrying his boyfriend Carlos Gonzalez on 28 January in New York City. Same-sex marriage is legal in New York.

Martin came out in March of 2010, and has since expressed his support for marriage equality. Martin has called for marriage equality in Puerto Rico, where it is currently illegal. He has said in the past “What I want is for them to say no to discrimination so that equality among us human beings may be a reality in my country.” Rumors of his getting married in Spain began after he was granted Spanish citizenship on 4 November.

This is still somewhat speculation. A Puerto Rican newspaper is reporting this, and they were told by a source close to the couple.

Via FOX News

The state Department of Health’s newly created website to apply for a civil union is hawaii.gov”>https://civilunion.ehawaii.gov .

Applications for marriage can also be made online at marriage.ehawaii.gov”>https://marriage.ehawaii.gov .

That former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum wants to impose his religious beliefs upon others is not a surprise. He is very open about it, in fact. In the following clip, Santorum explains not only his desire to have an amendment banning same-sex marriage, but how he wants to ensure that all those marriages are rendered null and void:

SANTORUM: I think marriage has to be one thing for everybody. We can’t have 50 different marriage laws in this country, you have to have one marriage law…

TODD: What would you do with same-sex couples who got married? Would you make them get divorced?

SANTORUM: Well, their marriage would be invalid. I think if the constitution says “marriage is this,” then people whose marriage is not consistent with the constitution… I’d love to think there’s another way of doing it.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Santorum is a devout Catholic, and his view of marriage is nowhere near universal. Instead, this would amount to the religious beliefs of a minority of Americans being imposed upon the beliefs of the majority. While legalizing same-sex marriage throughout the nation would not result in people having to give up their religious beliefs, it would force those religions that support same-sex marriage to be considered second-class beliefs.

The law exempts clergy from having to solemnize civil unions. The legislation reads “Nothing in this section shall be construed to require any person authorized to perform solemnizations pursuant to chapter 572 or civil unions pursuant to this chapter to perform a solemnization of a civil union, and no such authorized person who fails or refuses for any reason to join persons in a civil union shall be subject to any fine or other penalty for the failure or refusal,”

In the complaint, the lawyer representing the two churches stated that they thought that Act 1 did not include the exemption and Shawn Luiz wrote “Neither Act 1 not it’s [sic] implementing regulations exempts religious institutions, churches and houses of worship, clergy, officers and members from being subject to the injunctive relief and fine provisions of H. R. S. 489. Within the last 12 months, private individuals have already initiated complaints with the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission against churches and houses of worship for refusing to rent their facilities for same-sex unions and/or marriage ceremonies.”

They also claim that the bill will have a ‘chilling effect’ on people’s religious expression.

Via Courthouse News
Via OnTopMag

He said “Well, it’s not going to be a theme of my campaign and it’s not going to be a focus of my campaign. I’ve been very clear that if the gay marriage repeal came to my desk as governor, if it wasn’t repealed this session, that I would sign it. But my focus in the campaign is going to be on jobs and the economy.”

The economy in New Hampshire has not improved greatly since 2010, but it has improved somewhat. The likelihood is that many New Hampshirites will be less than happy with the Republican Party because of their focus on social issues rather than jobs or the economy throughout the last two years.

Republicans are expected to vote on the marriage equality repeal this January, and it is going to be vetoed by Governor John Lynch. It is considered unlikely that the Republicans will have enough votes to override the veto. If they do, it will go to the courts, and likely cost the state millions of dollars that it cannot afford.

New Hampshirites oppose the repeal of the marriage equality law by a sizeable majority.

Via OnTopMag

Mitch Melton of Camp Rehoboth stated that “Gay rights are civil rights are human rights women’s rights are human rights we are all human and we all deserve life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

The law was signed back in may by Governor Jack Markell, and comes two years after their Assembly outlawed discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Delaware is one of the top ten states with regards to the number of same-sex couples. According to Greg Oliver “This is something we never thought we could do.” Oliver and Andy Doroski live in Rehoboth. The two have been together for fifteen years, and they are planning on getting their relationship set in official writing. Oliver stated that “I plan to be down there the first day of business on Tuesday after the Martin Luther King holiday and signing up Andy as my spouse and he’ll become eligible for my insurance and my pension benefits and for the first time we don’t have to worry about retirement and old age anymore.”

Via WMDT

Via OnTopMag

1. There is no empirical evidence that supports the denial of marriage rights to people in same-sex relationships.

2. There is empirical evidence that denial of marriage rights to people in same-sex relationships is damaging to their psychological health.

3. There is empirical evidence that opposing denial of marriage rights initiatives has beneficial psychological effects.

4. Psychologists have colleagues and we have clients for whom this issue is relevant and important, and who appreciate representation. From a social justice perspective, significant benefits accrue to all of us when diverse families are legally and socially sanctioned.

Thus, it is resolved that, based on the available empirical evidence, the North Carolina Psychological Association is opposed to the May ballot initiative that would alter the North Carolina Constitution to make marriage between a man and a woman the only legal domestic union recognized in the state. This position will be communicated to NCPA members, and NCPA may be listed with other organizations opposing the amendment, such as Equality NC. NCPA may also seek to make coalitions with other mental health associations and agencies for the purpose of opposing the amendment.

So, let us have a fact-based debate about the issue of same-sex marriage in a civil manner. It seems pretty simple, right? There is no harm done to anyone if people can marry other people of the same sex, but there is harm if such people are denied that right.

And what facts does the other side of the debate have? Oh, that is right…nothing.

Related articles

• Head Of NC Baptists Wants Civil, Fact-Based Debate, But Not For Him (lezgetreal.com)

Harris is the senior minister at Charlotte’s First Baptist Church, and he now represents 4,300 NC Baptist churches and their 1.3million members.

The 45-year-old stated that “I hope we can express our positions — keep the conversation to the facts and our principles — and do it in a civil way. It doesn’t mean I’m going to change someone else’s position or they’re going to change mine. But in America, we all ought to be able to express ourselves without things getting out of hand.”

Here is part of the problem. The LGBT Community, by and large, does little in the way of demonization, and it is often the Christians who resort to the worst kinds of attacks. They often rely upon lies and not fact, and often it is they who are more than willing to ignore anything other than what can be twisted to support their religious dogma.

In one breath, Harris calls for the conversation to rely upon facts, but in the next…he says that same-sex marriages are not good for children. He stated “I just believe that marriage between a man and a woman is ideal. It is such a unique union, and it is absolutely essential to the future of humanity.” And that has been proven wrong time and time again. Evidence shows that children of same-sex couples are just as healthy and well adjusted as any raised by heterosexual couple. The facts are not on his side.

So much for relying upon facts.

He also stated that:

“Over the next several months, I am going to stress that this is an opportunity for the church to celebrate marriage and its biblical foundation — rather than talking about something we’re against,” he said.

“From a biblical position, all I can do is state my position: I believe that homosexuality is a sin … That said, I don’t believe that that position is at the heart of this amendment. If homosexuals choose to maintain a relationship and live together, that’s their business. I don’t believe people should be discriminated against.”

There is no choice here. Being gay or being bisexual or being lesbian is not a choice. The facts back that up as well.

Still, not all Christians or even all of those who are religious are supporting the bill. Reverend Nancy Kraft, the pastor of Holy Trinity Lutheran Church, objects to the amendment, but not on religious grounds. She stated “I just think it’s inappropriate as a constitutional amendment. It’s political grandstanding on the part of people who are anti-gay.” She also noted that the amendment would discriminate against lesbians and gays saying “I hope people really look at this as a broader issue and don’t think they’re voting on gay marriage. There is no rational way you can justify putting discrimination into our constitution. It’d be an embarrassment for North Carolina — which I view as a progressive state.”

Via The News Record

Of course, hoping to avoid shoving this issue into the Republican Primary, the vote will not happen until somewhere after 11 January or 18 January. The Republicans will be having their primary on 10 January. Most of the Republican candidates are anti-marriage equality.

According to House Republican Leader D.J. Bettencourt “The presidential candidates have a hard enough time getting their message out. This is the time for them to shine. We want them to get all the attention possible.” The Assembly will take up a few vetoed bills from last year to try and override them. After the primary, the Assembly will push laws which will legalize casino gambling in the state and try for a constitutional amendment banning the state’s income tax, thus further starving the state for money.

The push to overturn same-sex marriage in the state will be highly unpopular, and it appears that New Hampshire’s citizens are opposed to the attempt with almost 2/3rds wanting the legislature to just abandon the repeal process. Senate Republican Leader Jeb Bradley has said that he is not sure that they have enough votes to override the veto- needing 2/3rds of the House and Senate to do that.

The move will also show the state that the Republicans who have control over the Assembly are neither fiscally responsible nor concerned about the lack of jobs in the state. This is especially true given the almost certainty of a lawsuit following the passage of this bill given that it replaces same-sex marriages with a very watered down version of civil unions, and would allow anyone to refuse to acknowledge civil unions.

What is worse, there is uncertainty as to whether or not the marriages entered into under the old law will still be valid, and advocates are arguing that the bill is badly flawed. Even Bradley is uncertain about it, and the bill as written may not even pass the state senate. He stated “Civil unions has to be in the bill if we’re going to pass something and marriages that occurred while legal have to be grandfathered. My understanding is the bill doesn’t do either of those things. For me, that is a problem, personally.’’

As the Republicans abandon the economy to focus on social issues, a bipartisan group is beginning to air its first ad urging people to tell their state representatives and senators not to pass this bill.

Via Edge

He also stated that “I’m not going to introduce a gay marriage bill simply because it has no chance of passing the West Virginia Legislature. We just might be able to get a civil union bill through, so I’m going to give it a shot.”

Civil unions are not considered to be fully equal to marriage, but it should be noted that several states have civil unions or domestic partnerships while six states currently have full marriage equality.

Via OnTopMag

Chuck Norris

Perhaps Blizzard might want to consider pulling their World of Warcraft ads featuring Chuck Norris soon. While the actor may have been the butt of many a joke in Barrens chat back in the early days of WoW, today, the actor is making more of a name for himself by spreading lies about the LGBT Community- a community that, let us face it, Blizzard is having issues with already.

Norris has written several pieces for the infamous hate group the American Family Association. He is stating that the Obama Administration has declared war on religion. This is a line that many supposed Christians are trying to use in defending their bigotry and hatred.

One source notes that it appears that Norris may not have written the whole thing himself, but it went out under his own name.

Still, Norris wrote that “The Pentagon releases new regulations, forcing chaplains to perform same-sex ‘weddings’ despite their religious objections. (September 2011).” The reality is that the Pentagon has permitted military chaplains to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies under a couple of conditions. The first is so long as the state where the base is located has legalized same-sex marriage. The second is if the chaplain’s beliefs allow for same-sex unions. Chaplains are not required to officiate at same-sex weddings.

Norris also wrote that “Secretary Hillary Clinton demonizes other countries’ religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights (December 2011).” In this case, the words of Hillary Clinton are far better “Today, I want to talk about the work we have left to do to protect one group of people whose human rights are still denied in too many parts of the world today. In many ways, they are an invisible minority. They are arrested, beaten, terrorized, even executed. Many are treated with contempt and violence by their fellow citizens while authorities empowered to protect them look the other way or, too often, even join in the abuse. They are denied opportunities to work and learn, driven from their homes and countries, and forced to suppress or deny who they are to protect themselves from harm.”

Back at BlizzCon, there were two incidents that highlighted the problems that Blizzard has with the LGBT Community. The first being the question for a lesbian player about LGBT representation in the games, and the second was a rather anti-gay-epithet laden rant that was shown at the final concert. Now, they are running a serious campaign for new players with Chuck Norris.

Perhaps Bioware will take note of these missteps and pus through same-gender romance for Star Wars: The Old Republic forthwith.

Via QueerLife

Related articles

• Really Blizzard? Chuck Norris Does World Of Warcraft (lezgetreal.com)

The House Judiciary Committee has already advanced the repeal measure in October of this year, and the full House is suppose to take it up in January. Never mind the fact that, at this point, people are fed up of the focus on social issues and are ready to scream. They want jobs, not social issues that hurt the economy.

H/T ThinkProgress

Here is the Rainbow Sash Movement to discuss this growing fracture within the Catholic Church:

The Rainbow Sash Movement continues to challenge the schizophrenic teaching of the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church on the Lesbian and Gay person, gender equality, and family planning. We continue to believe that the effect of these type Teachings are based on bigotry within the Church, and not on Catholic Tradition. Clearly the “Sense of the Faithful” has said in opposition to the “Teaching Magisterium” that Gay Marriage, abortion, women’s ordination is a matter of one’s internal forum, and the Bishops clearly are beyond their authority by trying to direct that internal forum.

Catholics must judge the fruits of these Hierarchical positions which is causing conflicts and contradictions in the Church. Recently Archbishop Niederauer (Progressive) of the Archdiocese of San Francisco called Most Holy Redeemer pastor Fr. Steve Meriwether to cancel a vespers service before the first speaker in the series was scheduled to appear on Nov. 30 and asked him to withdraw the engagements of pro gay speakers, according to George Wesolek, director of archdiocesan communications.

Contrasted to this situation to what Cardinal Francis George a (Conservative) is doing in the Archdiocese of Chicago with the Archdiocesan Gay and Lesbian Ministry (AGLO) at our Lady of Mt. Carmel Parish. The Cardinal will be attending the Anniversary of AGLO as homilist, and has apologized to the board of directors of AGLO for his last visit when he angered many members by his inappropriate statements about the dignity of the Gay and Lesbian person.

The Cardinal while having a public hissy fit with Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois over these issues has allowed the pastor of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel to enter negations with Chicago’s first openly Gay Alderman Tom Tunney, and Richard Pfeiffer Chair of the City’s Gay and Lesbian Pride Parade at Our Lady of Mt Carmel Rectory. The meeting was concerned with the change in the Parade route that would literally bring the Gay Pride Parade in front of the Church doors, how ironic. Two years ago this would not have happened. The Cardinal would not of allowed such meeting to take place because of his belief that error has no rights.

Contrast this approach with that of Minnesota Archbishop John Nienstedt. He is asking Catholics to recite a “special prayer” condemning the right of gay and lesbian people to marry, the Star Tribune is reporting. The request is just the latest effort in the archdiocese’s campaign to whip up support against the state’s pending constitutional amendment to outlaw marriage equality. The prayer explains that marriage is “a source of blessing and joy,” before asking parishioners to deny this happiness to gay people.

These are but a few examples of how dysfunctional the Church’s position is on the Lesbian and Gay person. How both conservative and liberal Bishops have become caught up in the web of confusion it brings, and how out of touch they have become from the concerns of people in the pew. The bishops blind obedience to this backward teaching is akin to their corporate need to absolve their responsibility in the clergy sexual abuse scandal brought on by a lack of integrity and reasonableness.

The Rainbow Sash Movement believes Jesus had more to say about hypocrites than he did about Gay Marriage. What do the current GOP Catholic presidential candidates and Archbishop Dolan, President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops have in common? All appear to be violating one of Jesus Christ’s dictums “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”

Rick Santiourm as early as 2005 blamed the people of Boston for the clergy sexual abuse scandal. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) delivered a personal rebuke to Santorum on the Senate floor, saying “The people of Boston are to blame for the clergy sexual abuse? That is an irresponsible, insensitive and inexcusable thing to say.”

Newt Gingrich has a track record of marital infidelity that spans his life. Now he wants to be the standard bearer of Marriage fidelity in this country, and walk over the constitutional rights of Gay People. We understand the Christian concept of forgiveness and reconciliation. But does that apply to a sexual addict or is it more complex?

Certainly forgiveness would call for such an addict to enter a program to deal with his illness rather than allow him to sweep it under the rug of a Presidential campaign. Addiction is a disease and until Gingrich shows a willingness to deal with this in a counseling or seven step program all his claims to the contrary will be meaningless.

Archbishop Dolan supports both of these candidates because of their opposition to Gay Marriage. His position on the clergy sexual abuse scandal is that it is secularism fault, and the Catholic Bishops of the United States should not be held accountable for the sexual addictions of his priests. Like Gingrich and Santiourm, Dolan believes the clergy sexual abuse scandal was a liberal conspiracy to attack the moral conscience of the Catholic Bishops.

The Rainbow Sash Movement believes it is far better that our communication with God be a private matter, and not something we roll out in public. Clearly these three men are frail human beings in need of both forgiveness and reconciliation. Or are they attempting to use religion to bleach the truth from their own culpability in this matter. Scapegoating has nothing to do with Gospel Values.

Let us turn to the Catholic group the Rainbow Sash Movement to discuss this particular issue:

The Catholic Bishops of the United States are on the fore front of the cause of Bigotry. Archbishop Dolan the President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops shows how clueless and out of touch the Bishops have become when it comes to the daily lives of Catholics. His refusal to debate Joe Murray, Executive Director Rainbow Sash Movement only shows his lack moral backbone when it comes to facing those he bears false witness against..

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is trying to frame the debate on gay marriage as a matter of “religious liberty.” The argument is that government should not force individual believers, or churches, to act against their consciences. In essence, it’s a case for gay marriage — that sectarian dogma should not be imposed on the entire country.

In this season of Advent they have chosen not to light the candle of hope, and proclaim the Christmas message of love instead they fixate on pelvic issues, and throw theology, reason, and the poor out the window.

The Archbishop’s leadership has lost the narrative of Jesus whose focus is on love of neighbor, and of God. He has more in common with Rick Perry and the agenda of hate than he does with Jesus. The alternatives he provides are clueless statements that are neither based in Catholic Tradition, or reason especially those made during the Gay Marriage debate in New York

Dolan recently created a new “Ad-Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, to fight a whole series of church/state battles. They include the right of Catholic adoption and foster care agencies to refuse to serve same-sex couples, and opposition to a Supreme Court brief recently filed by the Justice Department seeking to erode a “ministerial exception” that allows religious groups to hire and fire in keeping with their faith.

It is the opinion of the Rainbow Sash Movement that Archbishop Dolan seems to have more knowledge about drinking, eating and baseball, than he does about theology. Moderation is not one of his appetites rather his constant whining and obsessing over bedroom theology is further reflection of his unhealthy fascination with what other people do sexually. If only he would show as much concern over what his priests do sexually with children, and hold those in the US Conference Catholic Bishops responsible for their strategy of cover up in this scandal, perhaps, people might be open to his appetite for bigotry.

Dolan once joked that if the Cardinals and Yankees played in the World Series, he would become the Big Apple’s “first pro-choice archbishop.” Most Catholic employers already provide coverage of sterilization and contraception, including drugs the church regards as forms of abortion. The message Dolan refuses to hear on this matter is he and his brother bishop’s leadership are being dismissed in the sexual conversation within the Church.

It is becoming painfully obvious that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is part of the problem when it comes to unity of the Church.

Our challenge is to continue to call on the Catholic Bishops to debate publicly on these issues even though they want to hide in their chancery offices and ignore the call for reform in the Church.

According to Brad Clark, the executive director of One Colorado, “The verdict is in. Poll after poll shows the same thing. Everyday support for the full legal recognition of gay and lesbian couples grows as Colorado voters come to know our families — Republicans and Democrats alike. Issues like this — with broad public support — deserve a full and fair hearing by the Colorado Legislature.”

Via KDVR

The fact that, on a near daily basis, Dolan makes remarks that are far worse than rhetorical devices by claiming a variety of easily disproven assertions that are not only insulting, but dangerous to the LGBT Community.

Here is the RSM’s response to the rejection by Dolan:

The Rainbow Sash Movement responds to the Archdiocese of New York statement concerning the debate challenge of Joe Murray our Executive Director, to Archbishop Dolan to engage in a debate on Gay Marriage at any Catholic University in the US.

Responding to that challenge Kate Monaghan, assistant communications director for the New York Archdiocese apparently does not understand the difference between a debate and a respectful dialogue process. This is an example of Archbishop Dolan not listening to what is being said. We believe this is why he is so clueless about what is causing the lack of Unity in the Catholic Church today. The debate on Gay Marriage could be a teaching moment for the Archbishop.

Managhan claims the Rainbow Sash Movement is not interested in ‘a mature exchange of ideas’, but by employing the following, stating that Archbishop Dolan is an ‘accomplice’ in ‘soul murder,’ ‘more comfortable taking cheap shots from his ivory tower,‘ lacks courage’ and will likely meet the request with ‘arrogance,’ you run contrary to the very nature of your appeal for civil, respectful dialogue.” She further inferred that Archbishop Dolan has not made his decision on the challenge.

Debating is a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: A dialogue is an exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue such as Gay Marriage, with a view to reaching an amicable agreement or settlement. Dolan has shown by his previous mean spirited comments on Gay Marriage that he is not interested in a respectful dialogue process that is why we are now calling for a debate.

The Rainbow Sash Movement stands by its opinion that Archbishop Dolan is part of the problem when it comes to the clergy sexual abuse scandal. He and his brother bishops have sought to cover-up their complicity in this matter by the same shell game he is now engaging in with the Rainbow Sash Movement over the Gay Marriage debate.

Joe Murray once again challenges Archbishop Dolan to a public debate on Gay Marriage, and calls on the Archbishop to have the courage of his convictions. Catholic Tradition as expressed by the “Sense of the Faithful” we believe is the movement of the Holy Spirit that calls on Archbishop Dolan to be responsible for his dehumanizing comments about the Gay and Lesbian Community on the issue of Gay Marriage.

Scott Rose over at The New Civil Rights Movement has noted that Judge Wiggins’ “written decision is chock full of unjudicial, unprofessional bias and political propaganda. Even if it turns out that he has properly decided on the one surviving allegation, the bias and political propaganda he wrote into his Decision constitutes conduct unbecoming.”

Mr Rose has decided to take on Wiggins, and has written to the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct. He is asking that they investigate Judge Wiggins.

To begin with, he wrote:

Whereas, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct receives and reviews written complaints of misconduct against judges of the state unified court system;

And whereas, the types of complaints that may be investigated by the Commission include bias, prejudice, corruption, prohibited business or political activity and other misconduct on or off the bench;

I, Scott Rose, acting both as a New York State resident and as an investigative journalist for — and contributor to — the publication The New Civil Rights Movement (www.TheNewCivilRightsMovement.com), submit to the Commission the present Complaint regarding Acting Supreme Court Judge Robert B. Wiggins of the Supreme Court in Livingston County in the State of New York.

This Complaint involves Judge Wiggins’s “Decision and Order,” having the Index Number 807-2011 and dated November 18, 2011. The Decision regards a challenge to New York’s Marriage Equality Act.

….

Judge Wiggins’s Decision emanates bias.

In this case, Defendant Schneiderman had filed a Motion to Dismiss, as well as a Memorandum of Law in support of that motion. In his Decision, Judge Wiggins said apropos of Schneiderman’s Memorandum of Law that it “spews sanctimonious verbiage.” The question arises whether an unbiased, impartial judge would in a Decision write that a Defendant’s court document “spews sanctimonious verbiage.”

An examination of the context of Judge Wiggins’s phrase “spews sanctimonious verbiage” solidifies an impression that in his Decision, Judge Wiggins included non-judicial, political propaganda indicative of bias. Where Judge Wiggins wrote that the State’s brief “spews sanctimonious verbiage,” he was emotionally expressing an opinion regarding the Plaintiffs’ allegation – (as made in the Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint) — of a “corrupt legislative process” including “the Governor’s violation of the constitutionally mandated three-day review period before the Legislature votes on a bill by unjustifiably issuing a message of necessity.”

Please head over and read the rest of Mr Rose’s letter. It is most worth is, and we hope that he can get an investigation started on Wiggins.

The decision now puts the party in conflict with Prime Minister Julia Gillard who supports the national ban on same-sex marriage. She has called for the party to support a conscience vote on the issue. That would mean that each member of Parliament would have the right to vote as they wished. Gillard did win on that front with a vote of 208 to 184. The Labor Party holds a slight majority over the ironically named Liberal Party. They oppose same-sex marriage and tend to be highly conservative in their views.

Currently, five Australian states have civil unions, and the majority of Australians support marriage equality.

In opening the debate, Gillard called for a respectful discussion saying that “You all know what my views on this debate are and I know many in this hall do not agree with my views. But what is the most important thing is that as we have this debate in this hall, we have this debate in a climate and atmosphere of respect.”

It is likely that a bill to offer same-sex marriage will go to the Parliament next year. Andrew Barr, the Deputy Chief Minister for the Australian Capital Territory stated that “Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex Australians are part of our community. We’re not nameless, faceless people who live on the margins of society. We deserve the respect and the dignity afforded to others. We deserve equality.”

Via AFP

According to the press release:

The Rainbow Sash Movement’s Executive Director, Joe Murray has challenged Archbishop Dolan, president of US Conference of Catholic Bishops to meet him in the public square at any Catholic University in the United States to debate Gay Marriage. Such a debate will not only be informative, but could highlight reason over homophobia.

We realize that Archbishop Dolan is more comfortable taking cheap shots at the Gay and Lesbian Community from his ivory tower in New York, but is he willing to show daring and engage in a disciplined debate that is focused on scientific, and social reality, and based on Catholic Tradition.

He seeks to shield Catholic Bishops from transparency and accountability.In our opinion, many lay Catholics have been exploited financially as well as spiritually in their rush to deny GLBT people the right to marry, when this money should have been used to help the poor rather than to promote a political agenda of discrimination that is not rooted in Catholic Tradition.

No one in the Catholic Community has suffered more from his leadership than innocent children whose minds, hearts and souls were torn asunder by those who stood in the place of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We agree with Baltimore’s former archbishop, Cardinal William Keeler who correctly described such horrific sexual abuse by a trusted minister of God when he used the term “soul murder” for it truly is that and Archbishop Dolan and his fellow bishops have been accomplices in that act. How can this man call himself pro-life? Archbishop Dolan has been very vocal in his opposition to any proposed legislation in the state of New York that has sought to hold sexual predators and their enablers accountable. He even presumes to give Penn State advice on their sexual abuse scandal.

We recognize that our Executive Director’s call for such a public debate will most certainly be met with arrogance, and even dismissal. However, such a refusal will only focus the spotlight on a Catholic Archbishop who lacks the courage to stand up for what he claims to believe in and meet in a public setting for a debate on Gay Marriage. It is time to replace the feeding frenzy of homophobia with a mature exchange of ideas in the Church..

By RSM:

The Rainbow Sash Movement finds the ongoing debate concerning gay marriage in both Scotland and the UK as a teaching moment for Catholic Bishops of both countries and indeed for the United States. This is a case study of the clueless leading the mindless among the Catholic Hierarchy. The bishops have become a model for hypocrites, and homophobes when it comes to the issue of fear based moralizing on the issue of Gay Marriage.

Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster in a sly move is being accused of defying Vatican guidelines on homosexual civil partnerships. In response, he says he is simply trying to defend the “profound human good” of traditional marriage. So while the bishops of England and Wales “respect the existence of same-sex partnerships in law,” he said, “the point we are at now is to say that they are not the same as marriage.” Well at least the Archbishop agrees with many gay and lesbian activists that separate but not equal mentality does not work.

In Scotland Cardinal Keith O’Brien has denounced same-sex ‘marriage’ as a ‘grotesque subversion’ that, if legalized, would ‘shame Scotland in the eyes of the world.’ Speaking outside the Scottish Parliament on Wednesday, ahead of the closure of the Scottish Government’s consultation on Gay Marriage into the issue next week, the president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland warned that if the Scottish Government legalized same-sex ‘marriage’ they would have ‘forfeited the trust’ of the nation.

Cardinal O’Brien’s warning to politicians was supported by Archbishop Mario Conti of Glasgow in his St Andrew’s Day homily. Like their their brother Bishops in the United States poll after poll shows these men do not represent the “Sense of the Faithful”.

Internationally this is recognized as part of the Vatican shell game. The Bishops are trying to redefine Gay Marriage as being about sex, and not love. We see this shell game being echoed in the United States by such Church luminaries as Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, and the newly elected President of the US Council of Catholic Bishops (aka as the US Council of Catholic Homophobic Bishops) is our own in house homophobe jolly old Archbishop Dolan of New York. Both lack the skill level to engage in a public debate about Gay Marriage that is based on reason and not fundamentalism. Dolan’s incompetent leadership is seen as one the reasons why Gay Marriage passed in New York.

Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul, Minnesota has a long track record of crudeness when it comes to reasonableness. Niensted like Dolan lacks the vision to understand that equality is not at odds with natural law.

Nienstedt first landed on the Rainbow Sash Movement’s radar screen in 2006, while serving as the Bishop of New Ulm, he wrote a column in his diocesan newspaper urging his flock not to attend the movie “Brokeback Mountain.” Nienstedt wrote of the movie, “The story is about two lonely cowboys herding sheep up on a mountain range. One night after a drinking binge, one man makes a pass at the other and within seconds the latter mounts the former in an act of wanton anal sex.” This is indicative of the sexual gutter our Bishops roam in. His anti-gay marriage ballot initiative to be held next year will only deepen the divide the Catholic Community on this issue.

The Bishop Conferences of all three western countries are increasingly becoming dismissed by the Catholic Laity as irrelevant. They are seen as out of touch with the world around them from the issues of abortion/birth control, through HIV/AIDS condom use to Gay Marriage through the issue of women’s equality and by extension the implication to the poor among us.

Increasingly they want to curse the darkness and not light a candle. They seem to be more comfortable with a fundamentalist mentality that feels more at home with Islamic extremist than reasoned based democracy. Overwhelmingly they appear to lack intellectually competency to engage in reason based debate. Rather they promote their agenda by fear based moralizing which is more comfortable in a radicalized theocracy than it is in a wholesome democracy. Seemingly their moralizing applies to everyone else, but not to them when it comes to the clergy sexual abuse scandal.

Let us be honest, it is absurd. While, yes, polygamy and polyandry could become legal in the not so distant future, but marrying inanimate objects or animals is just down right stupid, and honestly, shows that their arguments against same-sex marriage are just worthless.

Here is the transcript:

Wilson: So that’s why we are among many others who are fighting so vigorously for the traditional marriage, and it is because it is not just that we are—we’re not homophobic and we just hate homosexuals—but that whole mindset is being pushed upon America and the end result of America giving into it is that the door is flung open. And it’s more than just homosexual marriage or homosexual relationships that will come out of it, polygamy comes out of it, what’s the term?

Wilson: Polyamory, that’s gonna come out of it. We have talked about people who brought to the forefront their desire to marry—one guy had a desire to marry a building, another one a car, another one his dog. It’s just unbelievable, if you throw off the restraints and you say there’s no Christianity that’s going to guide how we look at this issue as a nation, then anything goes.

The alarmist view expressed by some that the recognition of the legitimacy of same-sex marriage will lead to the legitimization of polygamy misses the whole point. As Maura Strassberg, Professor of Law at Duke University Law School, points out in “Distinctions of Form or Substance: Monogamy, Polygamy and Same-Sex Marriage” (1997) North Carolina L.R. 1501 at 1594, the doctrinal underpinnings of monogamous same-sex marriage are indistinguishable from those of heterosexual marriage as revised to conform to modern norms of gender equality. This counters, as well, the argument advanced by many, that “in this day and age” when we have adopted expansive views of acceptable marriage units and common law living arrangements, the acceptance of polygamy, or at least the abandonment of its criminal prohibition, is the next logical step.

He stated that:

I am disappointed in Judge Wiggins’ decision because he did not go far enough. Judge Wiggins limited his decision to issues surrounding New York State’s open meetings law.

On June 24, 2011 when the vote was held, the Senate rules that permitted me to lay the bill aside and speak were violated. Whether or not anyone agreed with my position regarding gay marriage, I had the right to be heard on the Senate floor. My rights as a Member of the New York State Senate and as a representative of the people of my district were denied during the vote.

Not one of my Democratic colleagues stood up to protect my right to speak – not even my Leader Senator John Sampson. Thousands of people watched the process unfold online that night and bore witness to me being silenced. What a disgrace to our democratic process!

I commend Reverend Jason MacGuire for bringing this pro-family action before the courts, and I congratulate Liberty Counsel’s attorney Rena Lindevaldsen for once again defending traditional family values by representing New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedom.

Diaz and NYCF plan to continue their anti-family crusade.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (photo by Gage Skidmore)

Michele Bachmann is not having a good time of it. Seriously, Bachmann is just not doing well in the polls, and her views of homosexuality have really started to hurt her. So, what happens when one a High School student challenges Bachmann on the issue of same-sex marriage?

Well, of course, Bachmann refuses to admit that she is wrong about the damage that will occur if lesbians and gays can get married. She also appears to not get that she has been outwitted by a High School student.

The members of the Maryland Marriage Alliance believe, though, that marriage should be based solely on the basis procreation and be defined as being between a man and a woman. Pastor Joel Peebles of Jericho City of Praise stated that “Our nation has thrived on the fabric of the family.”

The group is recruiting interfaith religious leaders and community members to go out there and brow-beat their legislators into pushing for theocracy in Maryland. Coalition members are now saying that changing the definition of marriage impacts their religious freedom, even though they have yet to show that in any way shape or form.

Deacon Douglas Al Turner, the director of the Office of Black Catholics for the Archdiocese of Washington “It is not discrimination to treat fundamentally different things differently.”

Victor Kirk of Sharon Bible Fellowship stated that “When it became more obvious that the threat was real, the faith community and other supporters of marriage rose up.”

Their group is still going to have to contend with a number of other groups fighting for same-sex marriage including Marylanders for Marriage Equality which is made up of the Baltimore chapter of the NAACP, Equality Maryland and various other community members.

Proponents have also been organizing support.

Groups such as Marylanders for Marriage Equality, a coalition of political, religious and community groups, are working to legalize same-sex marriage. Members of Marylanders for Marriage Equality include the Baltimore chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Equality Maryland and community members who support same-sex marriage.

Archbishop Dolan (President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops) in an interview on the ETWN (Catholic Cable Network) focused on passing the buck of responsibility, much like he has done with the Clergy Abuse Scandal. Asked why the Catholic Bishops of New York were not more aggressive in fight to stop Gay Marriage in New York, he said it was the fault of their political allies, and he was deceived by them.

One could legitimately ask Archbishop Dolan with all the problems facing the Church both within and without why is he still whining about his political loss in New York. He really needs to suck it up and move on.
Instead of recognizing that the Church in the US has many wounds, Dolan continues to focus on the Gay Marriage battle he lost. One of the most obvious wounds facing the Church is not only those who were sexually abused by priests, but how the whole church has been raped by the bishops mishandling of this tragic scandal.

Our immigration policy is so totally out of whack its focus is to break up both gay and straight families coupled with this is Dolan’s love affair with the GOP over the issue of abortion.

The closing of Catholic Parishes and Schools, the shortage of vocations to the priesthood and religious life, the dismal record of the hierarchy in taking care of our retired priests and religious only exemplifies how out of touch they have become with Catholic people.

While the Bishops give a lot of lip service about the poor they continue support political positions that encourage poverty such as restricting contraceptive services to women who live in poverty. It is time for the Bishops to walk the talk.
Responding to Archbishop Dolan’s bloated whining about Gay Marriage Joe Murray, Executive Director of the Rainbow Sash Movement said “Only when the Catholic Bishops clean up their own accountability concerning the part they played in the clergy sexual abuse scandal will their moralizing be taken seriously. Until that happens they are viewed as hypocrites that are just being dismissed by a majority of thinking Catholics. “

Murray further said “Archbishop Dolan needs to repent for the areas in which he and the Bishops have failed, individually and together in seeking healing and renewal through the grace of Christ’s forgiveness.”

That is, of course, part of the problem is it not? The definition of what a bigot is reads as one who holds a “stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.” You see, while many LGBT Americans have no problem with people who want to say that same-sex marriage is wrong, they draw the line at pushing that into the law. Simply put, if you hate same-sex marriage, don’t get one.

Thing is, Maggie, we agree with you. You aren’t a bigot. You are a mercenary. You are a bigot for hire who loves to take money from rich donors for your own good.

Oh, and if someone brings up same-sex marriage at Thanksgiving…that depends, are they the bigoted relative like Maggie Gallagher, or are we talking about your parents who want you to get married and have children.

Big difference in conversation there.

Maine is one of three marriage equality battlegrounds in 2012 with the others being Minnesota and North Carolina.

In 2009, Maine overturned marriage equality in that state through the ballot, but today finds the state’s population expressing regret over that vote and supporting a push for same-sex marriage. According to Matt McTighe, the director of public education at Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders in Maine, the message is “really just talking about the journey of going from, not necessarily opposition, but just skepticism or concern about the freedom to marry for gay and lesbian couples, and going on that journey to being very supportive now.”

The push in Maine is to educate voters that lesbians and gays are not that different from straights. McTighe stated that “We don’t just want to make it a laundry list of legal benefits or anything like that. There are so many more important reasons to get married. It really is about love. It’s about committing to one person for the rest of your lives and taking care of one another.”

University of Southern Maine professor Ron Schmidt stated that “That strategy does actually makes sense. You’re potentially reaching out to people who might be on the fence and the idea of making that a way to think about it that’s personal, that’s related to aspects of everybody’s life, potentially — I think that’s smart.”

Pastor Bob Emrich, the pastor at Emanuel Baptist Church in Plymouth find the ads both effective and misleading saying that “People can love their children, their parents, their neighbors, whoever it is, without agreeing with them, without voting to change marriage. And that’s the disingenuous part.”

Emrich chairs the board of the Christian Civic League of Maine and he did note that the opponents of marriage equality do not have any ads to run yet, and that they will not until the measure gets on the ballot. He said that “We would remind people that the people of Maine already voted on this and were very clear in their vote.”

Which is not an overly winning argument to make. Since 2009, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has been repealed, New York passed same-sex marriage, and the nation has become more comfortable with the idea of same-sex marriage. So far, marriage equality supporters have 100,000 signatures, and all they need are 57,000 by January to get this on the ballot.

Via MPBN

Wong’s long time girlfriend Sophie Allouache is expecting their first child this December. Wong stated that a conscience vote “should not be Labor’s answer to calls for equality within the party and the wider community. Equality should not be a matter of conscience; it should be reflected in Labor policy.”

Many Left MP’s are furious over Gillard’s push for a conscience vote in order to resolve the parties internal issues with this subject.

According to SMH:

Liberal and National MPs on both sides of the gay marriage debate say the Coalition should be allowed a conscience vote. Nationals Deputy Leader Barnaby Joyce said the party was not opposed to a conscience vote but it was more than likely to vote as a bloc against any bill supporting same-sex marriage. ”If there is a whole Coalition push for a conscience vote there won’t be a problem from us,” he said.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has declined to grant a conscience vote in the Coalition.

She also stated that “The entire movie is based on the trauma — what it is like not being able to come out and live your live because there are so many restrictions. There is no liberty in not living your life the way you want, irrespective of who you are attracted to sexually. This movie will be an eye-opener for a lot of people who have just viewed these issues very superficially.”

The film is the first serious exploration of gay themes. In Nepal.

Sunil Pant, the only openly gay MP in Nepal, stated “Nepal has always been tolerant and we are now really ready to treat each other equally. It’s also about freedom of expression and our right to be able to watch films about our lives and issues. I am excited and can’t wait to see the film released in Nepal.

MP Pant was also instrumental in helping to organize two high-profile gay wedding ceremonies in Nepal involving couples from the UK and the US. Same-sex marriage has not been enshrined in Nepalese law, but since a monarchical rule in 2007, many LGBT rights have been enshrined in law, and a new constitution that is being worked on will likely make provisions for same-sex marriage. Religious ceremonies for same-sex couples are apparently widely accepted in Nepal, and starting last year, the Nepalese census began to include third gender as a designation.

Via Pink News