Graphic available here

Archive for the ‘Religion/Spirituality’ Category

What’s the Matter With the UK Lately?

Sunday, July 20th, 2008

I’m so used to them being far more progressive than us, but it seems even they have their share of homophobic nitwits lately, as evidenced by Lillian Ladele, and now Graham Cogman. He’s a police officer who (like many of his ilk) believes his “deeply held religious beliefs” give him the right to be a complete bigot, as well as an impenetrable shield from criticism for doing so.

Graham Cogman, a constable with 15 years experience, is taking action against Norfolk Police as he claims he was victimised for refusing to wear a pink ribbon on his uniform to mark a “gay pride” event, and for questioning the force’s stance towards gay men and lesbians.

The 49-year churchgoer, who circulated emails to officers quoting the biblical stance on homosexuality being a sin, claims he is being singled out because of his beliefs. The force has responded by saying it will not tolerate any “homophobic behaviour”.
…..
His complaint stems from a circular email sent to officers in early 2005 encouraging staff to wear a pink ribbon on their uniforms during Gay History Month.

After receiving the email, PC Cogman sent a reply to his fellow officers featuring biblical quotations about homosexuality being a sin. He objected again the following year when a similar email was again sent to officers.
…..

Cogman isn’t being victimized here, he’s pretending to be a martyr. His department was asked to voluntarily wear pink ribbons in support of gay pride month. He could have simply chosen not to, but instead he chose to use the department’s e-mail system to circulate anti-gay propaganda. He’s not an innocent victim here, and he is not being targeted for what he claims.

“The blatant support for homosexual rights in Norfolk Police makes being a Christian officer extremely difficult,” he said.

“I am not undertaking this action lightly but I have to make a stand when things become so blatantly biased against me just because I hold a faith.”
…..

No, you hold a bigotry that you hide behind a faith. It’s hardly the same thing. But then again people like you have a hard time discerning the difference, sadly.

 

Bishop Marc Handley Andrus Calls for Separation of Church and State

Sunday, July 20th, 2008

Let it never be said that I don’t give praise to religious individuals where it’s due. In this case it is most definitely due. Bishop Marc Handley Andrus of the Episcopal Diocese of California is raising his voice to call for the separation of church and state, at least when it comes to the debate over marriage.

INSIDE THE FIRST AMENDMENT

By Charles C. Haynes

First Amendment Center
…..
In a letter last month, Bishop Marc Handley Andrus of the Episcopal Diocese of California directed his clergy to “encourage all couples, regardless of orientation, to follow the pattern of first being married in a secular service and then being blessed in The Episcopal Church.”
…..
“There are a lot of benefits in getting out of the legal marriage business,” the Very Rev. Brian Baker told The Sacramento (Calif.) Bee in reaction to the bishop’s letter. “This way the clergy and the couple can focus on the spiritual blessings the church has to offer and not the political stuff.”
…..
Maybe the bishop is on the right track: Separate secular from sacred by drawing a bright line between civil arrangements and the sacrament of marriage. Each state would limit itself to defining marriage as civil benefits for committed couples (as mandated by state law) – and each religious group would be free to define marriage according to the tenets of its faith.
…..
Ending this church-state entanglement wouldn’t end the gay-marriage debate. But it might serve to reframe the issue by focusing on civic arguments for and against extending government benefits to same-sex couples. In my view, it isn’t the business of government to preserve the “sanctity of marriage.” Nor is it the business of government to dictate the meaning of marriage to any religious community.

At the same time, no religious group should be allowed to impose a religious definition of marriage on the rest of society. Various faiths in the United States define the sacrament of marriage in various ways. The establishment clause of the First Amendment should bar government officials from making public policy solely on the basis of a theological conviction about what constitutes “marriage.”
…..

I think the bishop has it just right. People can get their civil ceremonies wherever they choose, and if desired go to a willing church for a spiritual blessing for their union. Marriage is, after all, not strictly a religious institution no matter how much certain religious individuals and groups try to claim it is.

Mr. Haynes has it right too. It’s not the business of any religious group to impose its definition of marriage on the nation at large as different groups have different definitions. I’ll forgive him his failure to mention that people without faith also have their own definitions of marriage as I assume it was an oversight (but a common one).

Sadly I don’t see it happening. It’s far too rational, and fair, a plan.

 

A Win for Bigotry.

Tuesday, July 15th, 2008

Yet another homophobic bigot has refused to do her job because of her “deeply held religious beliefs”. She even took the matter to court…and won.

Lillian Ladele, 47, can expect a large payout from Islington Council after she was bullied and threatened with the sack for asking to avoid civil partnerships because of her deeply-held religious beliefs.
…..
The ruling that employees should not be required to act against their consciences has implications for the 18,000 same-sex ceremonies conducted nationwide each year and could encourage other registrars with strong religious beliefs to take a similar stance.
…..
After the ruling, Miss Ladele spoke of her relief: “I am delighted with the decision. It is a victory for religious liberty, not just for myself but for others in a similar position to mine.

“Gay rights should not be used as an excuse to bully or harass people over their religious beliefs.”
…..

Now why is it that any time you attach “deeply held religious beliefs” to something you can get away with it, even if it would otherwise be considered unacceptable? Would I be able to claim “deeply held religious beliefs” any time I don’t want to deal with certain groups at work, for example? Or is it only certain classes of people against whom one is legally allowed to have “deeply held religious” intolerance toward?

Rod Liddle says it a little more bluntly:

Crucial to its judgment was Ladele’s “Christian faith” which, she insisted, precluded her from giving a professional blessing to sodomites. I don’t know what would have happened if she had told the tribunal that she wasn’t a Christian or a Muslim or of any other faith but just hated poofs. Probably she’d have lost.

Of course she would. But cloaked in the guise of “deeply held religious beliefs” homophobia sounds righteous. Just over half a century ago racism sounded just as righteous, as did opposition to interracial marriage. Times may change, but the modus operandi of bigotry changes little, if any.

 
Hat tips to Ebon and The Freethinker.

 

Buffy’s Law.

Sunday, July 13th, 2008

Many people are familiar with Godwin’s Law.

“As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.” There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin’s Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups.

Not as many people are familiar with Poe’s Law.

Poe’s Law relates to fundamentalism, and the difficulty of identifying actual parodies of it. It suggests that, in general, it is hard to tell fake fundamentalism from the real thing, since they both sound equally ridiculous. The law also works in reverse: real fundamentalism can also be indistinguishable from parody fundamentalism. For example, some conservatives consider noted homophobe Fred Phelps to be so over-the-top that they think he’s a “deep cover liberal” trying to discredit more mainstream homophobes.

Well, I hereby announce Buffy’s Law:

Homophobes who quote Paul Cameron, or any source that cites Paul Cameron/The Family Research Institute, instantly lose all credibility in their attempt to demonize LGBT people.

Of course I’d never propose a law without an explanation so here’s the background. Paul Cameron uses his credentials as a psychologist to give his irrational homophobic bigotry an air of authenticity. The RRRW gleefully quotes his “research” far and wide as evidence that gay people are everything they’ve always claimed–promiscuous, disease ridden, incapable of committing, pedophiles, etc. But here’s what the RRRW (and Paul Cameron) aren’t telling people.

…..
On his curriculum vitae, he describes himself as a “Researcher/Clinician.” According to the web site of the Nebraska Department of HHS Regulation and Licensure, his license as a Psychologist has been “inactive” since 1995.
…..
In the mid-1980s, the gay press labeled Paul Cameron “the most dangerous antigay voice in the United States today.”2,3,4 Here are some important facts about him.

* On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that “Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists” by the APA Board of Directors.5 Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron’s claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.

* At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it “formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality.”6

* In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism” and noted that “Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research.”7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of “critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron.”

At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee’s report and passed the following resolution:

The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, “The Paul Cameron Case,” is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron’s frequent lecture and media appearances.”8

* In August, 1996, the Canadian Psychological Association adopted the following policy statement:

The Canadian Psychological Association takes the position that Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism and thus, it formally disassociates itself from the representation and interpretations of scientific literature in his writings and public statements on sexuality.

* Cameron’s credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to “Cameron’s sworn statement that ‘homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,’” and concluded that “Dr. Paul Cameron…has himself made misrepresentations to this Court” and that “There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron” (p.536).9

In other words, Paul Cameron is simply a bigot with a PhD and an anti-gay agenda. He hasn’t an ounce of credibility to anybody other than other anti-gay crusaders such as himself.

Additionally, Cameron’s Family Research Institute has been designated an official hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center because they “go beyond mere disagreement with homosexuality by subjecting gays and lesbians to campaigns of personal vilification”.

So from now on when you hear anybody quote Paul Cameron, The Family Research Institute or anything that cites their “research” you can tell them they’ve already lost, and cite Buffy’s Law.

 

AFA Unhappy that McDonald’s Calls it Like it Is.

Sunday, July 13th, 2008

Previously I wrote about the RRRW boycott of McDonald’s over their support of Teh Homosexual Agenda. Now it seems that American Family Association has it’s panties in a bunch because not only will McDonald’s not back down, but they have the audacity to speak the truth.

A spokesman for McDonald’s restaurants says those who oppose same-sex “marriage” are motivated by hate.

Earlier this month, the American Family Association (AFA) called for a boycott of the hamburger giant because of the company’s promotion of the homosexual agenda. The AFA took issue with McDonald’s refusal to remain neutral in the culture war.

But in a recent Washington Post article, McDonald’s spokesman Bill Whitman suggested that those who oppose same-sex “marriage” are motivated by hate. However, AFA Founder Don Wildmon disagrees and says McDonald’s has bought into rhetoric used by homosexual activists.
…..

Well gee, Don. What else would you call it when you oppose equal rights for an entire class of people for no legitimate reason? When you deride, castigate and persecute that group of people as a matter of habit? When you go out of your way to keep that group permanent second-class citizens in their own nation? I myself can’t think of any word other than hate, and it seems many other people find it a fitting term as well.

 

I Won’t be Using Insure.Com for My Insurance Needs.

Saturday, July 12th, 2008

They spread homophobic propaganda on their website, complete with phony statistics from none other than Paul Cameron. They even have the audacity to defend their use of the articles and claim they’re “impartial insurance information”. Riiiiight. (Hat tip to Box Turtle Bulletin.)

 
Addendum: On further research it turns out that the Robert Bland, the Chairman and Founder of Insure.com serves on the board of directors of the Illinois Right to Life Foundation. I’m even more convinced that article is on their Website as part of a political agenda, despite their denials.

 

Can’t Get Teens to Come to Church? Bribe Them With Deadly Weapons.

Saturday, July 12th, 2008

I wish this was a joke but it isn’t. An Oklahoma Baptist church used a $800 semiautomatic rifle as a means to lure teens to church.

…..
Windsor Hills Baptist had planned to give away a semiautomatic assault rifle until one of the event’s organizers was unable to attend.

The church’s youth pastor, Bob Ross, said it’s a way of trying to encourage young people to attend the event. The church expected hundreds of teenagers from as far away as Canada.
…..
A video on the church Web site shows the shooting competition from last year’s conference. A gun giveaway was part of the event last year. This year, organizers included it in their marketing.
…..
Friday evening, Ross said the gun giveaway had been canceled. Pastor emeritus Jim Vineyard, who ran the event, injured his foot and wouldn’t be able to attend. The gun giveaway was also removed from the church Web site.

Ross said the church would give the gun away next year instead. He said the church spent $800 buying the gun for the promotion.

First of all, if people are so opposed to coming to church that you have to bribe them with $800 assault rifles then you should just give it up. They’re not coming for the church, they’re coming because they want the rifle.

And don’t even get me started on how insane it is for a church to be handing out deadly weapons to children. Of course these are the same teens that, according to the RRRRW, can’t be told about condoms or get the HPV vaccine because it will make them promiscuous. But apparently they can be trusted with semiautomatic weapons. At least I live nowhere near Oklahoma.

 

Join Truth Wins Out’s Drive To Keep James Dobson Out Of The Radio Hall of Fame

Wednesday, July 9th, 2008

 

The Radio Hall of Fame Should Not Reward Intolerance and Lies, Says TWO


 
NEW YORK - TruthWinsOut.org (TWO) launched a campaign today to keep Focus on the Family founder James Dobson out of the Radio Hall of Fame. The Museum of Broadcast Communications nominated the anti-gay leader even though Dobson has been accused of distorting research and smearing gay and lesbian people for political gain. For example, Dobson told The Daily Oklahoman on Oct. 23, 2004, “Homosexuals are not monogamous. They want to destroy the institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the Earth.”

“It is outrageous and insulting that James Dobson would be nominated for the Radio Hall of Fame,” said Truth Wins Out Executive Director Wayne Besen. “We believe that character counts and nominees should have careers based on honesty and integrity - not discrimination, distorting research and outright lying.”

“Incredibly, the Museum of Broadcast Communications has also nominated Dr. Laura Schlessinger to its Radio Hall of Fame and Rush Limbaugh was inducted in 1993. The pattern is clear.”

To fight back against this offensive decision, TWO strongly urges fair-minded people to take three actions. First, sign TWO’s formal request to have James Dobson removed from consideration. Second, contact Museum of Broadcast Communications CEO Bruce DuMont directly, brucedumont@museum.tv, to express your displeasure. Third, as an option, vote for nominees other than James Dobson or Laura Schlessinger (the general public may vote, and the other nominees are Bob Costas and Howard Stern). It is urgent to act now, as voting comes to a close on July 15.

 

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE LETTER!!!


 
In the past two years, at least seven researchers have accused Dobson of manipulating or cherry picking their results to back his anti-gay teachings. Letters and videos documenting the concerns of these respected professors can be viewed at TruthWinsOut.org.

Dobson also profits from intolerance. He founded a ministry, Love Won Out, that promises to “cure” homosexuals - even though the so-called “ex-gay” leader of Love Won Out, John Paulk, was photographed in a gay bar. Dobson also continues to promote dishonest psychological theories about gay people that are rejected by every respected medical and mental health association in America, including the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association.

TruthWinsOut.org is a non-profit organization that counters right wing propaganda, exposes the “ex-gay” myth and educates America about gay life. For more information, visit TruthWinsOut.org.

 

Just Because I’m a Hopeless Romantic…

Monday, July 7th, 2008

Keegan and Lloyd

I came across this while browsing the news and had to share it. Tom Keegan and Davidson Lloyd have been together 31 years. They’ve had several commitment ceremonies. On July 3rd they finally had one that was legally recognized as marriage by the state of California. Of course the RRRW still refuse to consider their relationship as valid as opposite sex relationships, and if they have their way in November other couples won’t be able to marry as Tom and Davidson did (and as Sapphocrat and I will be shortly). No, the RRRW has no room in their narrow definition of family for Tom Keegan, Davidson Lloyd and their daughter, and that’s where we all lose out.

For Tom Keegan and Davidson Lloyd, “I do” has become a phrase they know very well – a phrase they have proclaimed time and time again during commitment ceremonies, informal weddings and unrecognized weddings.
…..
No longer will Keegan and Lloyd need to conduct wedding ceremonies that are not recognized by law, such as their first wedding in 1989.
…..
“Things will be different,” Connor Keegan-Lloyd, the 9-year-old adopted daughter said.
…..
For this same-sex couple, the private wedding ceremony signified a milestone in their long and public fight for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights that began 31 years ago when the two first fell in love.
…..
An endless row of shingled houses lines the street of Indiana Avenue. In this muted Venice suburb, a red and orange house stands conspicuously as the home of Lloyd and Keegan. On this day, July 3, 30 friends and family have come inside for the couple’s wedding.
…..

We need to defeat the Marriage Ban, #8, in November. It’s about love and equality. It’s about telling the RRRW that they do not get to define for everyone what marriage and family are. And for couples like Tom Keegan and Davidson Lloyd it’s about time.

 

The Calfornia Marriage Ban Proposition is #8.

Monday, June 30th, 2008

We found out a few days ago that they finally assigned a number to the Marriage Ban Initiative here and it’s #8 on the ballot. In response, my better half pulled an all nighter and created some new designs. Here they are and as always they’re available on a wide variety of merchandise including clothing, hats, yard-signs, bumper stickers, buttons and more.

There’s also this one, which we wore to Pride this weekend. It got lots of attention and has been selling well the past few weeks.



 

So there they are. The latest designs to help beat down the hateful anti-marriage amendment. Enjoy!